Chit-Chat: EVAN PETERS HAVE MY BABIES

Scarf said:

I think everyone is getting their hopes up too high for this series. Gonna see the movie in a few hours so I'll have a better idea if it's going to hold up. I mean, HP had a really bad first movie, but only the 3rd movie was actually good so I'd be surprised if this first movie isn't that great and somehow the others were good.

Click to expand...

100% agree with this. Imo Harry Potter 6 was the worse, because they added so much unnecessary stuff, such as random fires, and they skipped important parts (though that's not to say they never done this with all the films). Funnily enough, the 6th book was my favourite.

Anyway, moving on, I haven't seen or read hunger games. I've heard about it though...seems pretty interesting.
I think this is my first ever post in this section.

Agreeing that Harry Potter 6 was one of the worst. Although visually, I think it was stunning. Chamber of Secrets was terrible, and Sorcerer's Stone wasn't that great either. Though, for it's time, I suppose it was alright.

I thought the movie went at an even pace... until near the end, when it felt extreeeeemely rushed and everything moved way too fast. Important parts weren't included that I found to be important then - and, more importantly, moving into Catching Fire. They also changed too many things in those final ten or so minutes that I'm not happy with!

Planning to watch more than ever.

Sakamichi no Apollon - Shinichiro Watanabe + Yoko Kanno + Jazz = best anime of the year
Medaka Box - Nisio Isin + Shounen Jump + Gainax
Tsuritama - Kenji Nakamura + Aliens + Sugita Tomokazu
Mysterious Girlfriend X - Gives off the same vibe as Sundome which I love
Hyouka - KyoAni is all I needed to know.
Kimi to Boku 2 - Liked the first series.
Zetman, Sankarea, OtomoexAmnesia - MAL friends say they're worth watching.
Ozuma, F/Z - Will watch when they're complete

I'll also try try to replace Nichibros and Gintama with some airing comedy. Doubt anything will live up to those two though.

I actually thought the sixth movie was among the best... until the last half hour. I loved what they did with it, they added in a lot of humour and I really enjoyed watching the film. But then they borked the ending so badly I wanted to cry. Or actually more to the point, I didn't want to cry - and that was the problem.

But there were no bad Harry Potter films.

And Cat Dog, I was afraid you'd do that :(

Patchisou Yutohru said:

I thought the movie went at an even pace... until near the end, when it felt extreeeeemely rushed and everything moved way too fast. Important parts weren't included that I found to be important then - and, more importantly, moving into Catching Fire. They also changed too many things in those final ten or so minutes that I'm not happy with!

Click to expand...

I agree. I liked that they didn't skip over the beginning of the book, but I was disappointed that some of the most important things (to me) from the last portion of the book were either glossed over really quickly or not even included. That's part of why I think the movie version doesn't have as strong a message as the book. They made the movie to "audience friendly" since they wanted to have it PG-13.

This is exactly why I'm glad I saw the movie before reading the book.

I found a nice lil' discussion piece on what makes a good book-to-film adaptation. Since it starts off dealing with The Hunger Games, I haven't read it as of yet (going to see it on Thursday), but hopefully people will enjoy reading it.

You are on an American vacation, why are you online long enough to search out articles about book-to-film adaptations? :P

Mr Cat Dog said:

I found a nice lil' discussion piece on what makes a good book-to-film adaptation. Since it starts off dealing with The Hunger Games, I haven't read it as of yet (going to see it on Thursday), but hopefully people will enjoy reading it.

Click to expand...

That's a nice discussion and if I wasn't all wonky with flu symptoms I'd be able to say more about it, but I will say I do think an adaptation that tries to stick completely to the original story point by point will come off as brief and thin. I'd rather see the 'spirit' of the story come through even if some of the particulars aren't the same.

I think there needs to be a happy medium there, because I've seen some movies that were meant to be adaptations of books but then they changed key plot elements that kind of destroyed the entire story. For instance, My Sister's Keeper, which I went to see for the specific purpose of discovering whether Cameron Diaz can act (sometimes she can! Who knew?).

In case you're unfamiliar with the story, the basic premise is that a little girl who was born for the specific purpose of being harvested for organs for her older sister who has cancer sues her parents for the rights to her own body.

I hadn't read the book, so I didn't know this until somebody explained it to me afterward, but apparently they changed the entire ending. While in the movie



in the book



Personally, I think the ending to the book is far superior and carries a twist I certainly wasn't expecting; but that's not really the point. The very fact that they took the premise of the book and then entirely changed the final outcome makes it not a great adaptation at all in my opinion.

I'm all for leaving parts out and adding other parts in to make it film-friendly, but changing the plot or the essence of the plot is not OK with me

Scarf said:

I agree. I liked that they didn't skip over the beginning of the book, but I was disappointed that some of the most important things (to me) from the last portion of the book were either glossed over really quickly or not even included. That's part of why I think the movie version doesn't have as strong a message as the book. They made the movie to "audience friendly" since they wanted to have it PG-13.

Click to expand...

The fact that they made it PG-13 is a huge part of the problem I have with it. It's a movie about gathering children to kill each other for simply entertainment (rebellions years ahead of the main characters' times aside). One of the most criticized things about the movie was the shaky camera, but the only reason they did that was so to secure a PG-13 rating, probably simply because they could gain the under-17 crowd for money. But even in the two or three scenes they didn't use a shaky camera but killed someone were very disappointing for me.

Shining Raichu said:

This is exactly why I'm glad I saw the movie before reading the book.

Click to expand...

As disappointed I am with it (which isn't much; as a Harry Potter fan, I'm used to things not coming out the way they should have - and The Hunger Games did it better than Harry Potter in terms of keeping true to the book), I think whoever didn't read the books before seeing it is doing themselves somewhat of an injustice. Mainly because an overwhelming majority of the book is focused on the thoughts of Katniss, and a problem with the movie is that you can't see those thoughts.