Wot films are you watching?

[Lilliput King]

I don't get how one can miss the basic relationship between non-realistic renderings and their utility in communicating themes in ways which in more realistic contexts would seem heavy-handed, trite, or one-dimensional ... but apparently it is possible.

I don't object to the use of metaphor. A 2 hour metaphor that expresses nothing more complex than "fascism is bad" though; that's a fucking bore.

[Xercies]

I think it is a little bit deeper then facism is bad though and I can watch it quite a few times and take different meanings out of it, but maybe thats just me.

Grizzly Man - A really touching documentry on a bizzare man who lived with bears and eventually got killed by one of them, it really does paint this picture of a really deeply troubled man trying to escape the world of people finding solace in bears and how this warped his view over time. Quite touching, funny, creepy, beutiful, and all in all stays with you for quite some time. I'm really loving Werner Herzog.

[Kadayi]

I'll use Scott Pilgrim as an example as I think it highlights my point well; the graphic novels obviously have a lot more content in them, but they are unquestionably brought to life by film. Colours (completely absent in the novels) and sound makes the world vibrant and alive. It obviously tells a different story, it has to because those 2 hours couldn't compare with the, say, 6-8 or so it took to read, but the concepts, the characters were utterly faithful and near-enough the same story, but in a different manner.

Scott Pilgrim would of worked better as a TV mini series. There was too much to condense into a film and it suffered for that, on top of which Michael Cera was horribly miscast as Scott. The man (and I use the term loosely given he has the body of a 12 year old) has zero charisma to him. They needed someone who if not conventionally pretty, possessed the chops to carry a film as a lead, someone like Joseph Gordon Levitt for instance. Scott Pilgrim is not some nebbish asexual, the dude has a bunch of women fighting over him. Terrible fiend casting by Edgar Wright there.

[Nalano]

Scott Pilgrim would of worked better as a TV mini series. There was too much to condense into a film and it suffered for that, on top of which Michael Cera was horribly miscast as Scott. The man (and I use the term loosely given he has the body of a 12 year old) has zero charisma to him. They needed someone who if not conventionally pretty, possessed the chops to carry a film as a lead, someone like Joseph Gordon Levitt for instance. Scott Pilgrim is not some nebbish asexual, the dude has a bunch of women fighting over him. Terrible fiend casting by Edgar Wright there.

But Kadayi, that's how every other anime plays out: Perennial loser (who the audience, no matter how base, can identify with) finds himself entangled in a veritable harem of beautiful women who all fawn over him for no goddamn reason.

The Japanese have been pumping that story for years. It's only recently, however, that the likes of Edgar Wright and Kevin Smith and Judd Apatow have picked up on this.

[Xercies]

Yeah actually, you may not like it but actually it is part of the story so Cera was actually perfect casting lol

[The JG Man]

He really was. It's not made as apparent in the film, but he really is a jerk in the graphic novels. It's why him and Ramona work (or do they? I choose to believe they do) because they're both kinda jerks.

This strikes me as a very reasonable basis for objecting to the adaptation, although it has no force for me personally.

Yeah, I can understand it, I just don't think it's necessary to completely disown it. While there certainly is one perspective shown, the 'good' protagonist and it's largely said 'good', there are definitely things there to see that he's not exactly great either. Considering he [spoilers]tortures Evey[/spoilers]...look, I'm not saying the film is an amazing adaptation, although I'll certainly say it's good, but I don't think it was bad enough to disown it.

Whatever, it's still a great film. That ending is magnificent regardless.

I don't object to the use of metaphor. A 2 hour metaphor that expresses nothing more complex than "fascism is bad" though; that's a fucking bore.

That's quite limiting of the film. It wasn't just 'fascism is bad', it was what it can do to people, on both sides of it.

[Alex Bakke]

Just watched The Avengers. Oof. Was pretty good.

[sabrage]

Was it the adaptation or the original? The adaptation's boring as fuck while the other gave me a few jump scares, at least.

But I gotta say, Thai horror movies are much better than the Japanese horrors in my experience

The original. I have no interest in the remake. The scares in Ju-on were so telegraphed that the only two scenes I found impressive/unnerving were the one with the television and the climax, where the curse was passed on to Rika.

Was that sound suppose to be scary?

Apparently.

I am interested to know what you mean by this; I am not terribly well acquainted with Baz Luhrmann (although I have seen Strictly Ballroom and Moulin Rouge!) but Zack Snyder is now quite solidly on my radar following Sucker Punch.

Cheap-looking greenscreen/matte effects 100% of the time? Check. Ridiculous musical numbers that don't fit the scene whatsoever? Check. Frequent bastardizations of beloved classics? Check. Adoring git fanbase? Check.

[Kadayi]

But Kadayi, that's how every other anime plays out: Perennial loser (who the audience, no matter how base, can identify with) finds himself entangled in a veritable harem of beautiful women who all fawn over him for no goddamn reason.

Yeah actually, you may not like it but actually it is part of the story so Cera was actually perfect casting lol

I disagree. I think Scott needed something going for him in the charisma department, and Cera certainly didn't have it.

He really was. It's not made as apparent in the film, but he really is a jerk in the graphic novels. It's why him and Ramona work (or do they? I choose to believe they do) because they're both kinda jerks.

Sure Scott is a jerk, but he's still got some personality. Cera is anonymous. Still we shall have to agree to differ. Film started off well (Cera aside), but felt rushed towards the end. Pity.

[Rii]

Cheap-looking greenscreen/matte effects 100% of the time? Check. Ridiculous musical numbers that don't fit the scene whatsoever? Check. Frequent bastardizations of beloved classics? Check. Adoring git fanbase? Check.

And here I thought you were going to say something interesting. Oh well.

[Nalano]

I disagree. I think Scott needed something going for him in the charisma department, and Cera certainly didn't have it.

Then I suggest you avoid anime, because it'd likely give you an aneurysm.

[Ravelle]

Then I suggest you avoid anime, because it'd likely give you an aneurysm.

Cera can only play that "oh, okay" character he always plays sadly. Comics Scott was confident and assertive, movie Scott was just passive classic cera. He's pretty much the Nick Cage of our generation.

[Nalano]

Surely you mean Keanu Reeves?

[Ravelle]

Yeah, same one trick pony.

[sabrage]

I can't inject interest into shitty, boring directors, sorry.

[Xercies]

You cant really damn a director for a technique pretty much every film is doing now a days.

[Tritagonist]

Picked up 投名状 (The Warlords) earlier today for a paltry sum. It's one of those movies that comes up every now then in discussions about Chinese and Hong Kong movies, usually in a positive context, but one that I haven't yet seen - probably because there was a tidal wave of mass-scale historic action movies from China a few years ago, some better than others, and this one - despite it's good cast - just slipped by. In any case, I'm curious to see how it turns out.

Recently had a chance to see 暗いところで待ち合わせ (Waiting in the Dark). 田中麗奈 (Rena Tanaka) and 陳柏霖 (Bo-lin Chen) both do a good job portraying their respective main characters. 井川遥 (Haruka Igawa) also has a small part in this movie. The story itself is quite interesting; a person is pushed on to the tracks at a small railway station, and a blind girl who lives near the station starts to suspect there is a second person in the house. Small events on the sideline turn out to be important, making the somewhat curious conclusion quite acceptable.

[Rii]

Yeah, I can understand it, I just don't think it's necessary to completely disown it. While there certainly is one perspective shown, the 'good' protagonist and it's largely said 'good', there are definitely things there to see that he's not exactly great either. Considering he [spoilers]tortures Evey[/spoilers]...look, I'm not saying the film is an amazing adaptation, although I'll certainly say it's good, but I don't think it was bad enough to disown it.

Whatever, it's still a great film. That ending is magnificent regardless.

It's definitely possible for a film to be a terrible adaptation and yet a great film in its own right, even aside from the question of whether a good adaptation is one that adheres slavishly to the original text. Verhoeven's Starship Troopers is a terrible adaptation of Heinlein's novel by any standard, and yet it is also fucking awesome. Ultimately I think works should be judged on their own merit, but I don't begrudge fans of the original text for being unable to look past it. At most I just wish they didn't dominate the discussion so much. Course that's just because I haven't read any of the comics. ;)

[Xercies]

I find adaptations hard to gauge because i have been on both sides where i was dissapointed in a film adaptation not being close to the book and not really caring about some films not being close to the book because i hadnt read it.

[Jockie]

I watched Chronicle this weekend, it's the one where some male American teenagers get superpowers, and it does that thing with the wobbly camera to make it seem realistic or something. It was good though, well done effects, doesn't pull its punches and it means there's no need for that awful sounding live action Akira remake.