[ SECRET POST #2553 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2553 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.

















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 062 secrets from Secret Submission Post #364.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 2 3 4 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[(Anonymous)]

I was just thinking about how much I hated the 2002 Hound of the Baskervilles movie, not because it was bad, but because I hated their version of Holmes, hated Holmes and Watson's relationship, and spent the whole time wanting Watson to punch Holmes in the nose and make him cry.

This reminded me of how the 1978 Superman persistently rubbed me the wrong way because of their interpretation of Lois Lane, even though I thought the movie itself was great. And how annoying the weird old-time Hollywood romance conventions were in the Laurence Olivier production of Henry V, even though it was pretty brilliant.

Any one else have other examples?

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[sarillia]

There's an adaptation of Mansfield Park that I had to shut off half way through because their Fanny was simply not Fanny. She was cute though.

And this isn't exactly the same type of thing but I also will never forgive the original Disney animated 101 Dalmatians movie for taking out one of my favorite characters (and giving the new name she loved to someone else! that's just adding insult to injury) and changing another one of my favorite characters from a female cat to a male cat.

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[(Anonymous)]

I don't like Disney's version of the Little mermaid, not because it's a bad movie, but I find the ending overly sugary

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[(Anonymous)]

Same here. I loved the original story and hated the way Disney butchered the ending. Yeah, I know that it wouldn't fit the Disney style, but still..

The Hunchback too, I guess, but that had nothing to do with the original story, so I find that a ridiculous interpretation instead.

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[(Anonymous)]

I kind of had the opposite experience with an adaption I watched a few days ago (some fairly recent German TV production). I think it stayed pretty true to canon until the little mermaid threw the knife into the ocean. And then instead of the whole dissolving into foam thing, the witch showed up and was all: "Hey, you've passed the test! And as a reward you get to go on an adventure and explore the world you were always so curious about. Why don't I join you for a part of the way?" (And she got her voice back, and her selfless love showed that she already had a soul.)

After the initial knee-jerk "they changed it D:" reaction, I really love this ending.

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[greenvelvetcake]

I don't know, the original "you're such a good person, you get to go be an angel of light and sing to the little children forever" is a pretty sappy ending, too.

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[(Anonymous)]

The New Star Trek - at least, so far.

For me, part of it is that I just *hate* time travel, which is how this whole verse[?] got started, so it rubs me the wrong way a bit. ...I also fully admit that the fact Abrams took the project on despite, at the time, disliking Star Trek, then saying "I'm remaking it for people like me" doesn't help.

That said, so far they've actually been pretty good films.

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[(Anonymous)]

"I'm remaking it for people like me"

That is such bullshit. There are no shortage of films for "people like him", so why'd he have to take away everything that made Star Trek great and turn it into a generic mediocre action movie?

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[(Anonymous)]

+1

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[mekkio]

I can't stand Man of Steel because of what the writers did to Clark Kent and Jonathan Kent.

See, I've always thought Batman was cooler and Wonder Woman was more bad ass but Superman had a special place in my heart because of Clark Kent. Yes, he was born on a different planet but he was raised in Middle America to a loving, honest couple. And Clark reflected on that. Clark was just a down to earth (excuse the pun), good guy. Superman has always the struck me as the type of superhero who would move your stalling truck off of the train tracks and then fix the truck because as a farm boy, he has been fixing farm equipment most of his life. He's the one superhero you can go to and say, "My cat is stuck up a tree. Can you get him?" without feeling foolish that you are asking this person with god-like powers to do something so mundane. Like he wouldn't make you feel foolish for asking. He'd just go and do it because, hey, the cat is stuck up the tree and it's probably scared and you are worried and I can do it, so, let me do it. As all powerful as he is, he would stop to help a little old lady cross the street. He is just a good, good, salt of the earth guy.

I didn't see that Clark in Man of Steel at all. All I saw was Kal-El, superpowered alien, who spent most of his life running away from who he was and counting down the days until he discovered "his people" so he could get off of this rock. And the reason for that was because Pa Kent was a dick. Rather the, "You have powers, Clark. You must use them for good. To help those who need help and can't do it by themselves. You must always think with your heart" Pa Kent, we got, "Clark, never show off your powers. You must never help anyone least they discover what you can do. If people die, so be it." dick of a Pa Kent.

And I hated those two versions. Everyone always dogs Superman Returns. But at least I liked that Clark. Never once did I feel that he was only Kal-El. He was always Clark Kent, superhero.

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[(Anonymous)]

+over 9000

ALL OF THE APPLAUSE FOR THIS POST.

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[intrigueing]

YES.

I do not have enough zeroes to put on the end of a +1 to do this comment justice so just YES. YES. All of this YES.

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[dethtoll]

I like Man of Steel, but I agree 100% with this comment.

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[hands4healing]

You have made me remember why I used to like Supes when I was younger. Thanks.

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[dethtoll]

I'm not sure this counts as an "adaptation" but Frank Miller's interpretation of Batman is beyond skeevy and I hate it. He essentially made Batman into a borderline psychopath with slight pedophilic tendencies and a total sadist.

There's a reason people take the (forever unfinished) All Star Batman and Robin and write their own dialogue for it.

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[caerbannog]

Congo, because they changed too many things from the book which greatly irritated me. The "science" was even less "sciency", many scenes were outright missing, dr Ross was changed way too much and the ending was completely different >:[

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[(Anonymous)]

The movie version of Matilda. I don't care that they made it American, and most of the actors were great, but the girl Mara Wilson is playing is not Matilda from the book at all.

However, there was a long post on tumblr of movie!Matilda meeting the 11th Doctor, which I thought was completely adorable despite that she still definitely had the movie personality. Go figure.

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[(Anonymous)]

That one Secret Garden movie where it starts with Dickon dying. I know she wrote some stories that took place with the kids when they were adults, and maybe he did die in a war then, butttt I really didn't want to see it in an adaption of the first book. Dickon is my favorite SG character, I don't want to know he dies so young, ughh

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[(Anonymous)]

I feel that way about the Guy Ritchie Sherlock movies. It's not a horrible franchise, but that isn't Sherlock Holmes, it's Robert Downey Jr. in steampunk Victorian England. I don't have as much of an issue with Jude Law's Watson because that was closer to the books.

It was such a waste of the Irene Adler character, too. :(

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[darkmanifest]

The Aeon Flux film. I actually felt like a lot of care went into the atmosphere and special effects of the setting and into making the disjointed stories from the series make some kind of twisted sense that it was never supposed to, and I enjoyed that, but what fucked it up for me was turning Aeon into a humorless bland action hero on a deadly serious mission. No. Aeon was supposed to be a sardonic, wily, vain, easily distracted anarchist, devoted only to amusing herself by causing chaos for pretentious and controlling fucks like Trevor. Instead they had to make her a cookie-cutter tits-with-guns whose face might crack if she tried to smile. Boring.

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[tabaqui]

I detest the movie version of 'Out of Africa'. Yes, it's gorgeous and i could watch Meryl Streep all day, but it's ALL ABOUT THE ROMANCE. It's so annoying, because she was pretty damn careful in the book to avoid making the slightest hint that there was anything beyond deep friendship between her and Finch-Hatton, and they're practically having sex in the movie. ARRGH.

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[mimi-sardinia.livejournal.com]

I hate the movie adaption of the Michael Crichton book Sphere. They totally destroyed the point of Norman (lead character, played by Dustin Hoffman) and invalidated the actions he made in the book that basically saved him, Beth (Sharon Stone), and Harry (Samuel L. Jackson).

In the book, all the weird events that happen all all due to reality altering powers reacting to the psychological issues of the other characters.

Norman does not enter the sphere and gain the reality-altering powers causing this stuff until after he figures it out and realises the real problem is Beth and her issues. When he does, he can control them because he's the team psychologist and understands how human minds work. Because of that, he's able to talk Beth down and the last three of the team get out alive.

Thing is, in the movie, they had Norman go into the Sphere earlier and blamed a lot of the mess on him, which I feel invalidated his understand of psychology.

I also hate the Dungeons and Dragons movie, but I think anyone with even a small amount of critical opinion hated that.

Re: Adaptations you hate because of interpretation, not because of suckiness

[blunderbuss]

World War Z. Now, I've heard it's okayish on its own - no, I have not yet seen it - but what galls me is that they adapted a book with some really fresh and original ideas about the zombie apocalypse AND LEFT THOSE THINGS OUT. WHY!? What's the point!? Why adapt something different but not include the things that made it different!?

They had goddamn search-and-destroy dog teams to take out zombies! Specially crafted anti-zombie weapons! People clearing out the catacombs of Paris! An otaku fighting zombies with a WWII sword! Really awesome things!

But no, let's have ~BRAD PITT~ dramatically save the world. *facepalm*

Constantine

[insanenoodlyguy]

If this movie wasn't about John Constantine, it'd have been just fine. Hell, they changed it so much a few name changes and nobody'd even known

But this guy


Can't hold a candle to this guy.