Do Adaptations NEED to be Faithful? | TitanGoji Reviews
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 вер 2024
- ORDER TITANIOUS: linktr.ee/tita...
(Follow @TeamTitanious on Twitter for updates!)
BECOME A PATRON TODAY!: / titangoji
Donate to help the channel grow: ko-fi.com/tita...
Check out my Teepublic!: teepublic.com/...
FREE Workout + Meal Plan!: tinyurl.com/co...
Here are some other ways to support my channel: linktr.ee/tita...
Titanious is created by Davis Madole, and designed by Giga (@KuWota2k), Cream (@gingakirisaku) and Steve Thao.
Emotes by Dangbirds (@cidercrow).
Original music credits:
•Xylomar:
Spotify - open.spotify.c...
Instagram - / xylomar9
Twitter - / pradanitecrawlr
•triplebenis_: / user-786568264
•SCRYE Productions:
UA-cam - / scrye
Twitch - / scrye_live
Patreon - / scrye
#anime #manga #liveaction
Funnily enough, Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory's adaptations are both technically accurate. The Gene Wilder version was more faithful with the eponymous character and the book's tone, while the Johnny Depp version is more accurate to the portrayal of the events of the plot. I thought if Hellsing (2001) had better production, it would be as good as Ultimate, because, to me, the ideas fit a story like Hellsing. It just so happened to have horrid animation and some of the worst action scenes put on screen, live-action or animated.
Honestly, I believe, especially for anime, shot-by-shot adaptations are just commercials for the original work. At that point, unless the work is hard to find, I'd rather read the manga or the book. As long as the adaptation has the soul and vision in mind, it could turn a dystopian sci-fi story into a dark fantasy story, and still be great. It could be word-for-word, but if it strays from the tone, or fails to present the ideas behind the source material incorrectly, it'll still be terrible.
I think for movies & OVAs there's more leeway to differentiate itself from the source material. There have been circumstances where the film adaptation affected the source such as Who Framed Roger Rabbit? which the author ended up changing his story altogether & treated his original as non-canon. But I also think that departures leads to misconceptions such as The Mask. If you only seen the movie, you'd assume there was only one Mask character when that's not the case in the comics. The same can be said for it's tone & Stanley's character. The movie works but if someone decides to read the comics then they're not getting the same experience that they expected. I never seen Wanted 2008 but that adaptation removes so much from the comics that it might as well be something else. I'm not sure how that movie was received. Constantine 2005 is another one where the character is not what he's like in other DC appearances. I think people just gravitate to it because Keanu Reeves is in it. More so when Matt Ryan played Constantine in both live action and animation in which he perfectly nails the character. Meanwhile I feel Alita wasn't violent enough. I feel adaptations can't veer too much where it feels like a different entity or similar in name only. Yet something like TMNT can somehow work doing different things all of the time.
I would say they do need to be faithful enough, not word for word, but at least respecting the source material
Great video, although I do have a very slight correction to make when it comes to the upcoming Yakuza adaptation: While the leads were told not to play the game, I should mention that Ryoma Takeuchi (Kiryu) actually _has_ at least had some run ins with the series since his uncle is a big fan of it, so oftentimes he either saw him play the games or played a bit of them himself (I admit the details when it comes to this are blurry for me). Obviously it doesn't really change all that much, just thought it'd be worth pointing out.
Something I like to bring up is a potential that may have improved a movie everyone knows: Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers. Before the battle of Helm's Deep, a contingency of elves appear to aid the Rohan. The film stays book-accurate and introduces them with a character that hasn't been seen before in the film series, and just kind of feels like the moment is flat. This was done because fans complained about book accuracy around a certain character that was intended to take that elf's place in the film: Arwen. The idea was for Arwen to play much more of an active part in the story to aid in the exploration of her relationship to Aragorn, and would have been much more impactful had it happened, and would have tied into the support and relationships between different kinds of life that Jackson was interpreting from the source.
I think that's one of the major parts of the main question - if it's a sincere interpretation of the original work, even if not faithful (whether changing aspects to suit a vision or better work it into a new medium), it's much more likely to be a successful project. If done in spite of it, like when many stuidios see their work as "better" than the form of the original, it's much more likely to collapse when held to scrutiny.
I don't consider attack on titan live action "entirely as bad" as what most people do and being Asian, I had no expectation for the production quality to be "hollywood" level as what westerners for soem reason expect in a japanese movie produced domestically, but I don't rank it as high or recommend it to people because as it just don't give a new experience that is 'a must watch' moment. And since AOT has been so popular that people knows most of the characters is, It is reasonable why people will not be as receptive to alternate versions of them that is barely recognizable be in the movie as a replacement. Like although that change was understandable in the context of the movie replacing/altering "most" of the characters that people would expect to see in an Attack on Titan adaptation will obviously not something people are gonna be so happy about.
At least with adapatations like transformers, even if they had tweaked some characteristics of the iconic characters they are still there and the movie and is recognizable enough.
Great video
Great Video TitanGoji, Personally I think Blade Runner was able to create it's own identity away from it's original source material. A good film adaptation that took it's own liberty for me would always be The Shawshank Redemption. Beautiful movie that I think surpass the original book. Another good adaptation would be The Mist.
bro mad a entire essay speaking facts on art of adaptation just to shill hes book
beyond based
I think part of it depends on the popularity of the source material. If your character or source material is COMPLETELY unknown, like Guardian’s of the Galaxy or some members of the Suicide Squad. Then feel free to do with them as you please. But with adaptations that are more popular, I definitely agree with your sentiment about just keeping what is at the heart of the source material. Hulk 2003 is a perfect example of this IMO, Hulk’s dad is NOT the Absorbing Man in the comics, but his powers lines up with Brian Banner’s personality as a life sucking narcissist which is why it works so well. That being said, I think that if something is being adapted again, there is room to be more accurate in ways that a previous adaptation wasn’t, even if it was still good. I would like to see the classic Gamma bomb origin in a future Hulk reboot NGL. On video game adaptations, all I have to say is, the new Mortal Combat looks bland with unconvincing CGi so I’ll just watch the old one, it looks more visually interesting. And you might hate me for this, but to my understanding, japans live action Death Note movies are already very close to the source material ( I haven’t seen them yet) so I’m kinda ok with Netflix Note being different from the source material forgive me 🙏. You mentioned earlier that you consider Devil Man a lazy uncreative adaptation. Is that one of the reasons why people hate Zack Snyders Watchmen? That’s actually why I love it.
Great video and a new favorite of mine.
There are exceptions , Haunting of Hill House on Netflix is not faithful , but damn is it good. Honestly i like it better than the book.
But then you do have extremely unfaithful adaptations where its clear that by ditching that it clearly did a disservice to the entire production. The Witcher series comes to mind
Not a great fan of extremely faithful adaptations, kinda feel like a waste of time.
I say respect the escense or at the very least respect what the fanbase like the most. Whatever you change just procure the end result is at least as good as the original.
And also the less you mess with character design the better.