The Secret Garden 2020 ruined my life | reaction and commentary
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 бер 2021
- We've been doing movie reactions for adaptations of Frances Hodgson Burnett's The Secret Garden, and the 2020 has ended me.
Showcasing brilliant young child actors (Dixie Egerickx, Edan Hayhurst, Amir Wilson) and a shockingly misguided reinterpretation, journey with us to post-war England (???????) where a young Mary Lennox must co-habitate with her estranged relatives (Colin Firth with barely scoliosis) and... and a magic garden. That really isn't much of a secret. Watch as Mary Lennox discovers her Poison Ivy like powers over the local flora and uses it to dominate the wills... and the hearts of those around her.
This is it. This is the worst one.
Intro: • Playground Love
(All views expressed are from a first, mostly blind, viewing. If you feel the need to come for me, please don't) - Фільми й анімація
I somehow managed to misspeak Frances Hodgson Burnett's name AGAIN as Louise Hodgson Burnett. I am ashamed and also passed away due to mortification. Please forgive the family members I am survived by 😩😩😩
Problem with the 2020 version is the garden is too magical, it doesn’t feel real. The emotional beats are never earned, it felt rushed. The 1993 version ironically feels magical because of its humble earthy feel. The 2020 version just left me feeling empty.
True. The '93 version only has 2 supernatural elements (to my knowledge): the smart robin and Mary summoning her Aunt's spirit to call the Lord. "I'm in the garden!" (The latter scared me as a kid).
1993: The Secret Garden
2020: The CGI Garden
There is a earlier version than the 93 version it’s in parts the kind made for tv
@@choppersworld5094 I've seen all the versions except the 1919 version. Most people would know the 1993 version though.
They built the garden from scratch, in the '93 version.
it’s the costume and set design for me. They really said “color scheme, don’t know her?”
Genuinely how dare they, like, WHO WANTS TO LIVE LIKE THIS??
Genuinely feel the 1993 film is a masterpiece, I first watched it when it came out, I was seven years old and it left a big impression. I return to it a lot. The 2020 adaptation does not even come close.
I wholeheartedly agree. I can understand the story the 2020 version is telling, but why didn't it want to tell the story of The Secret Garden?? Part of the power and beauty of the '93 version is that it always treats the material with respect and artistry. It's making a film with the same tools it would in adapting Don Quixote or Anna Karenina, and I am grateful to the filmmakers for that.
makes you miss the 1993 version, doesn't it?
There's always the '93 version when you need it 💚
Not gonna watch this because the secret garden 1993 is my favorit movie!
Exactly! That is what I am going to do after the 2020 version - to rewatch a 1993 one which is far way better.
3:00 Look, I haven't watched this movie so I don't know _exactly_ what you're talking about here, but... I think society has a habit of romanticizing abuse and trauma victims/survivors. Folks get real uncomfortable about the idea that some people might not be the perfect little victims they picture in their heads, and when they aren't, a lot of the times they end up being demonized for it. Mary's behavior in the book makes sense for a child with her upbringing. She was emotionally neglected by her parents and never really had a chance to form a bond of love with them, and the ones who actually raised her were people that she was taught to treat as lesser. When people think of neglected children though, they wanna think about the ones who crave affection like a man lost in the desert craves water, the ones who'd do anything for anyone who gave them even crumbs of it, the ones who desperately want attention... But they don't want to think about those other children. The ones who become averse to touch and feel indifferent towards human interaction, the ones who lash out in anger and want to be left alone. Which sucks, because, well... They exist. And it sucks in fiction too because then all stories end up looking the same and people will actively change the ones who don't fit the mold so that they do.
4:15 This "I'm not a child" shit is already annoying me and I'm not even the one watching this. Like, I get it, you don't have to spell it out a hundred times on the blackboard for ppl to get it 🙄 I'm sure the children watching it don't need them to keep waving plot points right at their faces for them to get it either. Children are smarter than this. Show, don't tell. This just looks lazy.
Yeah they go through a lot of effort to make Mary Lennox likable in her grief from the beginning, because I guess kids can't handle character arcs?? 😩😩
(also in the 2020 adaptation, Mary's father is good actually, and it's just that her mother suffers from undiagnosed depression which,???????)
@@pillboxmovies Like, what is even the point of her character then??? Mary is both an emotionally neglected child and a bratty spoiled child. Take one of those things out and her character becomes flat and one-dimensional. This movie somehow managed to ignore _both_ of them, making Mary a nice girl with a good father and framing her mother as just "misunderstood". I mean, who even is this girl anymore?? 🤷🤷
They turned Mary Lennox into a half-baked Sara Crewe.
Haha, that's *perfect,* thank you!
Well, it's not like most adaptations even keep _Sara Crewe's_ personality (or looks)
@@Anonymous_Gambito Yes, but most adaptions don't suddenly make Sara a spoiled brat who develops an interest in gardening.
@@CoolG97 Well, the '93 version did. (She couldn't dress herself, for God's sake).
The savage girl line honestly makes sense in the original adaptation if you think about it. I mean she was from India. You know how they felt about "foreigners" in those days
The thing that made the 90's movie sense of whimsy so beautiful and ethereal is because it was gentle and grounded, like one would properly tend a wound. The movie's very pace and atmosphere encompassed the concept of the healing process. The problem with this remake is - in Nostalgia Critic's own words to a similar scenario - "it crams whimsy into you like Tinkerbell being shoved up your ass". Instead of pleasant and soft, it's bombastic and loud and over-the-top because it's more worried about looking asthetically magical than giving us a magical story, that's why it fails so miserably (aside from the aforementioned technical choices that make it far more impersonal and emotionally distant towards the audience).
Ngl I’m a book stan haha. When I read books I’m picturing it in my mind like a film anyway and The Secret Garden book was the best one imo. 🖤
Haha never a bad bet
"But why set this post-WWII thooo?" EXACTLY! 1993 will always be my favorite, the one with Margaret O'Brien has a charm mostly because I like her and the color sequences are neat, and this....... exists.
yep the worst one. didn't understand the story at all. does mary even garden in this one? like wtf. your reaction was stellar. You nailed everything wrong with this film.
It's one of the worst things I've watched on this channel. Would've been fine on its own, just *don't stamp the Secret Garden title on it.*
You can't manufacture magic...you also can't squeeze Marry Lennox into the 2020's style 'strong perfect woman' rhetoric.
It's such a bummer by comparison. There was already so much good stuff to work with, why toss it all away?!
I logged into my account just to say how brilliant and spot-on this review is. XD Subscribed!
Thank you so much!! Yeah, I rewatched this video and my feelings have *really* not changed 🤬
The book is the best. But the 1993 version was amazing!
This movie tried so hard to read between the lines of The Secret Garden novel that they hallucinated a whole new story from it 💀
I feel ya man I couldn’t even finish it after the the dog got it’s leg stuck
I watched this version and then immediately revisited the 1993 version as well as listen to the Broadway cast album specifically for the purpose of cleansing this one from my mind
I love the 1993 version the musical is sweet and the books is alright 👍
The only good thing I can say about it is that it isn't worse than the Shirley Temple version. The 1987 and 1993 versions are both faithful adaptations and have the right visual and emotional feel to them. This one is like a fancy cartoon, shiny and shallow.
lmao great reaction!
From the Bengal famine they moved to the 1947 partition. I wonder why
Martha was one of my favorite characters from the 1993 film. She was everybody's source of positivity, even Medlock's in the end. This Martha is so off-putting.
This movie just feels so cluttered to me, from the shots to the dialogue. Some parts that would have benefited the show don't tell showed to much and kept us from just understanding without need for a character to explain every other thing. This feels like it tried forcing the appeals of what they think people want in new age cottage core vibes, but it feels to artificial to even be aesthetically pleasing.
Made my skin crawl, even for a raccoon this is trash
Yeah, in the end it seemed like such a cynical adaptation to me. Someone figured The Secret Garden was a well known IP and decided to pump it full of familiar benchmarks, like magical CGI, neglected mothers, and postwar aesthetics. Nevermind engaging with any of the ideas presented in the source material. Especially rotten since it's marketed to kids who are more likely not to know any better.
my fave movie the secret garden 1987 version
🤫
@@pillboxmovies And the 1987 version also starred… Colin Firth! He played an adult Colin Craven. (This version has a flash forward.)
Oh my GOD this version's worse -
I haven't read the book yet. But my biggest opinion is I like the 1993 secret garden version which I think it's amazing.
But the new one two years ago on 2020 The secret garden was one of the most disappointed movies I have ever watched. The only thing I like from The 20/20 version is the way the opening was it's almost like in a novel. But I wasn't really too big on the 1940. Which the story was based in the 1900s, personally I really hated the The 20/20 version because it lack potential, so basically it was kind of painful for me to see that part of that movie version.
I just don't understand why they would add/take away things that are not in the book. Why make an adaptation and not just a completely original movie? The dog scenes where awful and unnecessary too. Had me crying for the wrong reasons.
I mean I dont think it makes sense to make an third adaptation and make the same thing over and over again. I feel like it fits with the current generation more.
20:00 bout took me out🤣🤣
Wow. Uh .. I really enjoyed? watching this reaction. I'm gonna go watch your reaction to 1993. I uh .... I love that one and I'm a little scared but you can't dislike it as much as this one.😅
Haha, I really like the 1993 version.
@pillboxmovies yay. Looking forward to it.
I read the book around 5 years ago and recently watched the movie. I honestly dont get the hate about the movie. I feel like around every film adaption is getting hate unnecessary.
The way the movie was shot and the addition of secret rooms was interesting cuz it adds to the house (why have an estate in the 19th century and make it boring?),making it more interesting and the paintings of the house, and tiny details of her dress, the wall painting of her room, colin’s room had their own interpretations. There was a lot of hate on the fact that the garden was magical removing the magic in the portrayal of books. But it could also be seen as in the view of the children believing in its magic. There wasnt much “magic” happening except for wilting of a few leaves or movement of the grass or flowers. Obviously its a childrens movie so no one in their target audience is gonna be questioning or nitpicking every little detail.
Most of the reviews were just comparing it to the 1990’s version which I understand but if you watch something first and watch another remake, you are obviously gonna like the first one better. And the children of now generation would not be as willing to watch a 1990’s movie compared to a recent movie. It fits with the current audience and I get the book audience being unhappy with this but why bother making a 3rd adaptation if its the same thing over and over?
And the change to the scene where she is un India in 1947(around independence and partition) it was actually nice to see how women and children’s side of history which is overlooked or not talked about enough in history. There was even an incident in india where British women and children were burned as they were returning to Britain from India.
@@shlokak7773 the problem with this movie is that it deviated so much from the novelーa novel that has so much potential to have a better adaptation than the beloved 1993 film (my favorite)ーthat this shouldn't be called an adaptation of the novel anymore. This should've been called "inspired" by the novel.
And you're wrong that the current generation doesn't resonate with the 1993 film and many more before that. To have that kind of mindset that everything needs to be rewritten and adjusted for the "current" generation will just breed close-mindedness towards a time that is different than ours.
As someone who is part of the current generation, I hate stories made in and for our time. It's so bland and tries so hard to be woke. It's much more scared to be canceled than express creativity and the darkness of the mind.
Mary is a neglected child filled with resentment and touch-aversion. She is rude and disrespectful, as she was raised in the time where this kind of behavior was enabled.
But what we got from the 2020 movie is, quoting another commenter, a half-baked Sara Crewe.
As someone who resonated with the ORIGINAL Mary Lennox from the novel, this 2020 depiction of her basically invalidated me. They erased that "bad part" of her to make her,, likeable? Like wtf?
Watching this 2020 movie as a current generation person is a waste of my time.
I feel like your Secret Garden reactions are incomplete without the 1975 version. No CGI animals or weird jungle gardens in that one! The only problem with it is the absolutely awful ending, but otherwise it's an enjoyable, faithful adaptation. If you do ever watch it, look out for the weird obsession it has with long shots of people either walking toward a stationary camera or walking away from it (and in a few scenes, both), and also slow zoom-outs and then continuing to film the rest of the scene from about ten miles away. 🧐
Well now that you've bullied me into it, I guess I should try to find a high quality copy of it 😤
Just curious, what’s so awful about the ending? I do love the 1975 version though. And the 1993 version.
Mary is cut out of the ending in that version. She is simply... not there. The movie ends without even mentioning her. It's only the last 3-4 minutes of the movie, but that's the feeling it always leaves me with... like, "What the heck, where is Mary???" It's so weird to end a movie with no mention of the main character, and it's unsatisfying. It's my favorite version, but my least favorite ending, if that makes sense.@@siennaprice1351
i agree so much of what you said hurrrrrhhhh
1993 version and the japanese animated series, not this remake. Mary's character really changes, and that's make her characters ruin the show.
I couldn’t connect with this version of the movie. I wasn’t impressed. The 1993 version will always be one of my childhood favorites
Nah i have the book the movies based off of 😢
Too much CGI and why did they change the era when the story takes place? Well, there's always the 1993 movie and original novel for those of us who want a good SG story.
There's a STEAMPUNK version of the Secret Garden that was made in 2017 and it's TRASH, hahaaha
Just...why? Why would anyone think that was a good idea?
It's unfortunately another case of a modern adaptation completely disregarding the original source material. The classics are a classic for a reason. Shoving them into the contemporary 'hollywood' filter and social formulas of the modern aesthetic tears them apart. This adaptation really missed the mark in every sense (at least for me). The plot was jumbled, the characterizations and motivations completely wrong and unsatisfying, the visuals an eyesore, costumes mediocre and far too much CGI. The emotional message was completely misrepresented. This film left me with the thought 'wow, they must really not have liked The Secret Garden very much when they made this.' Long live the Agnieszka Holland version!
Watch the 1970’s series. It’s way better than this trash. I would say watch the 93 version but I know you’ve seen that :)
Worst adaption I’ve ever seen. Couldn’t even finish it.
I hated all the CGI coloring of the forest. Forest are beautiful and colorful but not that bright and it's not a forest it's a garden. I don't like the political correctness of adding black people or biracial people. It's OK if all the characters are white and this is coming from a black Haitian American man. I don't like the political correctness of adding black people or biracial people. It's OK if all the characters are white and this is coming from a black Haitian American man.
Tbh most of the servants in the 19th century were black or brown so it was portrayed correctly rather than for just inclusion.
@@shlokak7773 not true
@@majemwe Just google it. 🧍🏻♀️
Marry's character was too much of an entitled weakling
Medlock didn't have enough strength and authority (Maggie Smith's portrayal was far better)
The magic thing was just out of place OP shit that defeats the whole message of the movie
Not even talking about black british people in post-war era.