[ SECRET POST #168 ]

[degrees.livejournal.com]

⌈ Secret Post #168 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6. [ NOT!SECRET ]

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.



Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #024.
Secrets Not Posted: 0 broken links, [ 1 ] not!secrets, 0 not!fandom.
Next Secret Post: Tomorrow, Saturday, June 23rd, 2007.
Current Secret Submission Post: Here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[perfectdays.livejournal.com]

#1. I think everyone else has already said what I wanted to say regarding this but eh. So yes, if the criteria you are judging the movie by is how well it represents the book (and if it was your favourite childhood book, I can understand why you would, and why you would feel let down), then of course it's going to fail by anyone's standards.

But I think that the important thing to remember here is that the movie isn't really a transformation of the book. It's more like, Miyazaki has taken a brilliant idea, and then run with it to create a new and equally amazing story. You could even think of it as like an "alternate" version of events. Just because the plot and storyline turned out to be completely different, it doesn't mean that it's bad.

If you try to treat the movie as a completely seperate entity all on it's own, you may find it much more enjoyable. I know I did. I think both the book and the movie are beautiful, but each in their own seperate ways, and I think it's sad that people compare them, because... you can't, really. Apples and oranges.

[crackjaw.livejournal.com]

I agree with your point, and I would probably even share it, but what really bugs me the most about those movies is that they call themselves an adaptation of the book, when it is in fact very far from it.

If he had given it a different title I wouldn't gripe nearly so much. But the movie's supposedly his interpretation of the book, and it is so far from anything even resembling the book that it's not even funny.

Though I suppose this is a bit hypocritical of me considering I liked both the I, Robot book and the movie (though I wish it had a different title, too!).

[perfectdays.livejournal.com]

I'm afraid I do have to disagree with you on the point that it is "so far removed from resembling the book" because it still resembles the book in enough of a manner that if he'd said it wasn't connected to the book and given it it's own title, he wold have been slammed for plagiarism |D;;...

Anyway! I'm not gonna say what you should like and dislike, 'cause that's lame yo. To each their own, yeah 8D? I'm sorry you didn't enjoy it, but I'm sure there will always be lots of other movies for you to enjoy in the future that I will hate, so! That's just how it goes~.

[crackjaw.livejournal.com]

You do have a point there (I was exaggerating, I have a tendency to do that, sorry), but I guess I would have felt a lot better if he'd said it had been inspired by the book, instead of saying it was an adaptation.

[perfectdays.livejournal.com]

Heh! Dw about it, we've all exaggerated at some point |D;;. And I get what you mean, but... eh! Not much we can do about it now. What's done is done. I dunno, maybe I'm just too laid back or sth!

But another thing is that I make it a personal rule to never read/re-read a book less than 12 months before the movie comes out in cinema, if I know it's coming out. 'Cause it's SO much easier to enjoy the movie that way. Otherwise you spend the whole time in the cinema going "BUT WHAT ABOUT-- AND-- OMG THEY MISSED THE BIT WITH THE--" and so on hahaha. I'll admit that there are SOME movie adaptions that I've hated regardless, but that's neither here nor there 8D.