[ SECRET POST #2622 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2622 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 076 secrets from Secret Submission Post #375.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[nyxelestia]

I honestly hate this whole attitude about how "impure" adaptations are, how bad deviating from the book is, etc., and the whole "books are always better" mentality.

Books and movies are two completely different forms of media, so trying to compare them is like trying to compare apples and oranges - you're not going to get anywhere because despite the similarities, they are ultimately just too different to be compared directly to each other.

I'm not saying there aren't bad adaptations - just that I don't think they are bad because they are adaptations or because they deviate from the book.

[dreemyweird]

I get what you are saying, and I agree with most of it (the purist attitude can be annoying, and admittedly I sometimes am guilty of displaying it), but I don't think that comparing adaptations to the original canons is altogether useless. Even if we do not consider the cases when to convey the spirit of the book IS the point of the adaptation (or is claimed to be one of the purposes, at least), there still remains the issue of the direction the adaptation has taken in reinterpeting the book source.

Say, if we have an amazing character in the book, but the adaptation took the character and destroyed every amazing aspect of their personality, I'll be pretty bitter about it - not because the character is different, but because the changes that were made were pointless and have spoiled the character in question.

As I see it, HTTYD is like this - it took an amazing book series and changed it into a lousy adaptation. That's why I don't like it.

(Sheldon Reynolds' Holmes series, for example, is one of my favourite Holmes adaptations. Its plots have zero to do with the canon source.)

[elialshadowpine]

Exactly. There are some adaptations I hate, but not because of trueness to the book, but because of how they are as movies. There are some that I have disliked because they changed the ending -- but that was just as much because I felt the ending did not work for the movie as much as it was that it differed from the book.

And in some cases, I prefer the movie ending. I much preferred the altered ending to Stardust, although I know a lot of Gaiman fans do not. I think even Gaiman himself said the changes were better for the story as a cinematic experience, which is cool. Some authors get very bent out of shape about changes, which... I can understand on one hand but on the other, that's part of the whole deal with optioning movie rights. Unless you're a big name author (and sometimes not even then), you have no creative control over what they do with the film... so if you aren't okay with that, don't option the rights. Simple as that.