No it's not, you only have two crappy videos, 819 subscribers, and your username is literally DikPix. So yeah, I'm pretty sure your content is the furthest thing from better.
In a way, Mr Poe is a villain. He only realises the danger after they are nearly killed each time. Yet he makes the same mistake after the same mistake. It's as if Olaf drugged Mr Poe with something to always make him cough and forget they are in danger.
Having seen the full Netflix series and the movie, my opinion is if they series and the movie could get married and have a child, that child would be the absolute perfect representation of the books. Both were great. :)
Absolutely agree. I think the series was very good, but what would be perfection is if it included the things that made the movie better, like the movie Aunt Jo and movie Poe and the movie’s music score and Jim Carrey as Count Olaf (as much as it pains me to say it I think he was better...Neil Harris just doesn’t scare me, and if Carrey had been directed better and told to be more scary and less whacky, he would’ve nailed it completely)
Bro my biggest turnoff from Carrey’s wackiness was the over abundance of it. It’s definitely good at some points, like for the points when you really need to hate him, and ESPECIALLY at the points when he’s doing characters like Stephano. But there were parts in the movie when he was God awful terrifying and not so wacky, like when he leaned into the car to whisper into the Baudelaires as Poe was taking them away...those moments of his that Harris could never live up to. And I would have just loved to see more of that. At the end of the day, Olaf needs to be viewed more as a villain in my opinion. And too much wacky makes me wanna love him and find him hilarious, when the whole point is for me not to love him.
The “do you have a hall pass?” scene scared the crap out me when I first saw it. The way he doesn’t seem to move and the way the lighting is, as well as the joke and voice give off a very creepy and unsettling tone
One thing that struck me about the show is how similar Klaus and Violet look to their movie counterparts. Especially Violet. They had to have gone out of their way to do that.
Charles Jones they went off how the book describes the characters and how they look. That’s why they look alike because both adaptations tried to get people similar to what the books desribed
@@nahitsdragon9873 it's not just cheeks it's pretty much how the shape of their faces are very similar cause even if u followed the description of the books u could still end up with different looking people
Not really the film made a huge mistake on little yet extremely important details like Clause having no glasses, the glasses are important to the plot of the story and also they left out certain characters etc
I feel the movie, though lacking and sometimes mistaking in details and at time not following the book to the dot, does fluster my memory and yet do allow some new imagings in my thoughts - which then surprisingly lead me back to reading the book again and rediscovering things and rereading lines that has new meaning, being much older now... As a graphic designer, the film’s visual contrast is perfection and the coloration which bring the mood is hmmmmmmmmmmmm, so good. Although, I do love the pastel effects that lead me into a more surrealistic somber tone when played along with the music, jokes and Harris’ deadpan face... I love both of the adaptations, but when in doubt... the book and your brain will take you to a much richer place. But that’s just me...
And to add, we have a few missed YA movie adaptations- this one, The Golden Compass, Spiderwick, and the more urban-looking but still has some ‘period-plot’ Mortal Instrument. Ooo... Beautiful Creatures.
@@billlupin8345 Actually, they wanted to make sequels and Carry expressed interest. However, it didn't make enough money despite being based on a popular book series and featuring actors like Carry and Meryl Streep.
the series is truer to the book. you said that the whole peppermint allergy, poe reading the note, restaurant thing was too dragged out, but that’s what happened in the book.
MonsterousXXL yes, but i’m just saying that while he says the movie is better, i think the series is better because it’s more accurate. that’s just my opinion :)
The point of a live action adaptation is not to be exactly like the source material, but to be visually believable and interesting while respecting the source material. I've watched the series, read the books and watched the movie and I still like the movie better because while it's not 100% true to the books, the visual effects, the storytelling and the tone (the whole adaptation itself) make it easier for me to take it seriously. Every character is likeable and you understand what they're all about just by looking at them. Accuracy doesn't mean it's better.
I actually like how slow paced the series is. I feel like the way the show drags on and moves slowly is actually very appealing and a nice way to torture my poor soul by watching these kids getting into worst situations by the second. For me, it really accentuates the whole "unfortunate" aspect of their current situation. Same goes for how incredibly dumb Mr. Poe is!
Absolutely well said. Show makes the situation feel so much more tragic. I don't agree when someone says the show is too cartoony and humorous. It is actually very, very dark, but you have to look at it deeper. I personally think the show sometimes is indeed way too streched, but I still 100% prefer it over the movie. And when I first watched the TV show, I was honestly amazed by how much it can irritate, but somehow in a good way. Mr Poe is such a fking dumbass. I think I was close to screaming when I was watching it. XD And it really makes you feel the pain, the tragedy and the injustice of those events. It's even better with next seasons.
Well this is lat but I both liked and disliked It j really liked that snicket was narrating and how slow it moved but in some cases I feel the episodes could have been a little shorter
Exactly, like they deliberately used time & inconvenience as a good plot device. It's low level self aware nuanced meta which made me feel WAY more immersed in the show. Like I already loved it from episode 1 but the fact that I genuinely thought the show was over multiple times and yet every time they gave me another reason to dread the next episode but desperately want to see what lies ahead.... it's impressive
Oh please the movie did a way better job setting up characters and development. This show clearly casted as much black people as possible cause they had to rather then cast based on skill.
There were only two major characters that were black and one small family. The actors for Aunt Josephine and Mr. Poe did a good job. Are you being an idiot or racist?
Somehow the person in the video doesn't realize that that's LITERALLY the whole point of the character... He's a Naive adult who thinks he knows better than the children because he's an adult and they're children.
Obviously, since the film crammed 3 books into 90 minutes and had to end it after that. Apparently there was a sequel film planned after the first one was released, but that never happened unfortunately.
Here's the difference: The show is doing a much better job at getting the books' story right. The movie did a better job of setting the tone and mood which was awesome but the story was extremely rushed and sometimes painful to watch.
I agree with you, but I also feel like some of the bit characters were WEIRDLY casted in the show. Principle Nero, Aunt Josephine, the a lot of Count Olaf's henchpeople besides Fernald come to mind. On the other hand, they got a lot of the main characters right, so I guess it evens out.
@@stephenskinner7207 absolutely! The kids are all very well cast in the show but there are some questions other castings. The movie castings are perfect I think.
@@stephenskinner7207 I think it is because in the books a majority of the characters were originally white and with the movie industry wanting to be more progressive they switched out some of the originally white characters and threw in an actor of color for more diversity. Don't get me wrong, I am fine with watching a show with diversity but when a book describes a person to have say "red hair and green eyes" but the movie producers hire someone who has "black hair and blue eyes" it can be frustrating to the die hard fans that like the book and the movie to be the same. Also Mr. Poe was described to be a fat shorter man but the show hired a fit tall man which was frustrating to me, not the fact that he was black but that he wasn't the described physique.
I read the book series as a kid and I enjoyed both adaptations, but I do like the Netflix series much more because it has the room for all the little details. I don't care that the series is hard to take seriously, it works like that. A Series of Unfortunate Events is dark, but it's not grimdark, it's supposed to be often be funny. For that reason I think Neil Patrick Harris even has the better Count Olaf.
I agree. I read all the books and really got into them when they came out. I couldn't stand the movie adaptation. They tried to cram too much into such a short amount of time, yet simultaneously wasted precious time on things that weren't even in the books. However, I enjoyed the series adaptation. There was more detail, it was much closer to the books, giving each book basically a films worth of length. I LOVE Neil Patrick Harris's Olaf, I was immediately worried that he wasn't going to be serious enough, as much as I love him as an actor. However, I think he nailed that balance between dark humor and evil that is everything the books were. I really hope they continue this series....I would love to see a film adaptation of Esme Squalor. I dressed up as her in her flame dress one Halloween, one of my favorite characters!
Somehow, despite being largely an ironic comedy, the show's Count Olaf was SO MUCH SCARIER and Lemony Snicket actually made me feel heart broken and world weary. Neil Patrick Harris and _KRONK?_ I mean, mad props to them; who knew?
In my opinion, the show purposely made the children's misfortune into a joke to demonstrate how kids are never taken seriously which is a main theme throughout the franchise. People don't see through Olaf's obvious disguises to show that adults see what they want to see, but children are keener and can see things as they are. It's supposed to stress the incompetence and flaws of all the adults around them to demonstrate that adults don't have it all together, and emphasises the kid's awareness and intelligence. It's a bold contrast that emphasises points which I felt was missed in the movie adaptation. It's caricature more than realism. The series elaborates the plot and doesn't leave the viewer with any untied ends or questions (by this I mean questions that aren't to be answered in later series) whereas the movie rushed and changed the plot for constant jam packed action. I don't think it's accurate or fair to judge either adaption against the other without taking into account the plot of the book as it is the source material and an adaptation is supposed to bring the source material to life. We also must not forget that its target audience is children, and by adding more humour and lightheartedness to the show it makes it easier for children to stomach and connect with characters, and helps them retain interest in the show, all the while keeping the dry and sarcastic undertones of the original material
The series isn't about kids vs adults, it's about morality. Regardless of whether the characters are good or bad in the books they are generally useless or their life's work ends up being nothing. The only exceptions are the kids but not because they are children, it's because they approach things differently. The good guys hide in secret societies yet are revealed to all throughout the series The bad guys are open about their evilness (when they are honest vs the lies of the good guys) but easily get by due to disguises. And then in the middle you have the three children who aren't showed to really be good or bad. They are shown as being basically emotionless in every medium because they represent the moral grey area/subjective morality. The bad guys aren't bad and the good guys aren't good because the good guys have terrible things they did in their pasts same as the baddies and most of the baddies have tragic backstories that set them on their current course.
Perhaps that is a deeper analysis of the series. I haven't seen anyone else mention this before, but on a far more literal level, it does demonstrate how kids are not taken seriously. Books are subjective, and there is no right or wrong answer when it comes to what a book is about or what it is representative of. I like your view on it but that doesn't invalidate mine. I started my statement off stating it was my opinion because it is exactly that. I didn't write the books, I didn't produce the series. That's just my take on why it was presented the way it was and that I thought that was how they were trying to tell the story
at least 1 other person mentions the subjective morality theory but yeah, there's probably at the very least the theme of children not being taken seriously in there.
I haven't seen anything but then again I don't avidly read up on it either. It's very interesting though, and adds another layer to the franchise that will make it interesting to rewatch with the theory in mind. Thank you for telling me!
xAdvil is it hard being so lonely all the time? don't you just want to scream for attention?! ugh I know sweetheart it's unbearable, but do try to be quiet... your tantrums are disturbing logical thought, and basic civility. kids these days. amirite? There can and should be more than one theme to a piece of art. As a wee one I remember reading these books and picking up on the authors cues about how the adults can oftentimes misunderstand or be almost willfully ignorant of the plight, or sorrow, or valid concerns of anyone they don't seem to think is a "grown up" something I think a good number of children feel from time to time. I.e. any and all references to the phrase "parents just don't understand". As an adult underlying themes whether intentional or not (I vote intentional) can be a "relative morality" as one might put it or how surreal life can be even in the face of great tragedy almost as if the world doesn't even notice you're hurting... because it doesnt. Either way I enjoyed the show better because like you said it adhered to the source material and it brought to life the nostalgia of reading a great book series. I also felt the tone matched better with the show. very dry but interesting main characters and very excentric but ultimately dull and dimwitted supporting characters. but hey, that's just my take on it.
i absolutely adore how you express your opinion and the way you make your videos is very soothing and satisfying to watch. the narrated parts and the examples from the source are perfectly balanced, your voice is not too loud and it's relaxing to listen to but never boring. I really needed this type of calm content right now, thank you.
Daniel Handler (Lemony Snicket) was much more involved with writing and producing the series. So it makes sense that it’s closer to the books. The books have the same humor and tone as the tv show, the movie wanted to go darker and there’s nothing wrong with either. I enjoy both adaptions for different reasons. It’s nice that they are not a carbon copy. Otherwise a remake would be useless.
I know you said this wasn't about which was the better adaption, but the reason I like the series better is because I love the books and it is a better adaption. Because it's such a dark story, people forget that the books are actually hilarious, and I think the series is really similar in tone to the books. The books also do get darker as the story progresses, so I'm hoping the series follows that as well.
Connor Rose That's exactly the reason I got to love the serie. I haven't read the books, but I can notice the way they involve the narrator and I simply love it for the way he breaks the 4th wall. Honestly, I think that making the story darker is not necessary, it is as dark as it can be, and in the 2nd season it gets worse, as you said.
While i agree there was comedy in the books, it is not to the extent that the netflix series depicts it, which kills it for me. The netflix series is too bright. The fact that they introduce all the details we learn in the last few books about VFD very early on, and as side characters takes away from the bleakness. Instead we are given a lot of hope every episode due to the secretary's involvement. In the books we never have that. it's a lot more bleak of an outlook which makes it creepier and that much more heartwrenching. Go back and read the books recently. I did a couple weeks back and it makes the movie look like a much better adaptation overall.
Arnoldo Ramón I actually get annoyed with the series telling me how dark and was a scene is supposed to be, then watching it finding is neither very sad nor dark.
Honestly? There's such a thing as Darkness-Induced Audience Apathy. The high points and levity in the netflix series actually do lend the darker points a certain amount of weight that the book series simply lacked as it went on. Every adult character in the books is either evil, incompetent, or dies. It actually helps that there are some people on the Baudelaires' side that are helpful and competent.
I've never read the books, but I must say I like the series better than the movie. The contrast between the comedic tones with the darker themes makes it a more interesting and delicious dish; whereas the movie is rather one-note with its melancholy. I find the depressing aspects of the story more pronounced after you've spent some time laughing at hilarity. Therefore the series is more effective.
I agree, just because series takes a comedic tone, it doesn't mean it's less "dark." The series put the main characters in scenarios of moral ambiguity while the movie puts them as "ah, poor orphans."
The movie is one the those things I remember watching over and over again as a child, and it just keeps getting better and better the more I watch it. Just the tone and visuals make me want to cry, it felt so uncomfortable watching NPH being all goofy and quirky after being so enthralled in Jim Carrey.
I actually really loved the movie as a child, it was so dark and mysterious. The show is great but the movie will always have a special place in my heart
@@hihello607 Either this is a joke or not, I know there is a 2nd and 3rd season. The second season was released in March 30th 2018 and the 3rd season was made in january 1st 2019!
Actually, I kinda like both, and can't chose what's my favorite.The series has a tone sarcastic and methaphoric that I loved, and, obviously, there's all the history from the books.But the film has this dramatic and scary form, that I love either.Also, the most scenes that I remember enjoy were from the movie. Your video made me realize that.:)
One thing you didn't discuss was the music. Thomas Newman's score for the film is fantastic and really complements the mood and atmosphere of the film.
Dead Bricks Thats all debatable. In my opinion the acting in the movie...particularly from Carey...was horrible. I mean he pretended to be a dinosaur at one point. It was Carey being Carey. And I never felt truly fearful for the kids. I liked some things from the movie...but in my opinion the tv show is a much better adaption.
The film captures the spirit of the books and is just made with such better quality, I'd say. I do like both, but everything about the film is produced much better. The opening of the film "The Little Elf" scene? I thought I was in the wrong theatre when I saw that, but then it turned out to be a total headfake and that was brilliantly hilarious. And that joke kept popping up in the film to remind us! The MUSIC of the film - composer Thomas Newman's score was worthy of that Oscar nomination, as his music often is. Olaf's acting troupe is much better in the film. I mean, in the show, they come off as kiiinda bland and irrelevant. A character may be intended to be a boring character but that doesn't mean it should bore the audience. In the film, when the two ladies of Olaf's troupe suddenly appear in the play singing "Nothing in the world can keep the count from his beloved bride!" - they just throw that in our faces and it's jarring but then you realize what's going on and it was hilarious how overtly overconfident/presumptuous Olaf is so that he goes to that length to tell everyone and especially the children that he cannot be stopped. The hook-handed man vs Klaus "I'll make a nice filet outta you!" They all get their moments in the film with solid performances. And Carrey's Olaf - like this video says - can seamlessly go from silly to menacing to hilarious. For instance when the kids first arrive and ask what's upstairs and Olaf stops in his tracks and slowly looks up and then towards the children with the words: "The TOWER...which You are NEVER to enter....UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES..." giving us a close-up of that Eye. That was genuinely kind of freaky. To us and the children...until he turns around and has to prevent himself from laughing. (Musical score at that moment is also terrific). The show is food for us fans because we get to see a more literal rendition of the books and so much more of the stories. But where the show fails is keeping things interesting or tonally creative. It becomes monotonous, sometimes. And it's sometimes far too silly, whereas the film has kind of a cap on silliness levels. Mr. Poe and Aunt Josephine are SOOOOO annoying in the show. Josephine's the worst - not because her character demands it, but the actress just goes overboard and isn't believable. The first two episodes are directed by series producer Barry Sonnenfeld who directed the Men In Black films, Wild Wild West, Get Shorty and produced and sometimes directed the SUPERLATIVE series "Pushing Daisies". If you haven't seen that show, you simply Must drop everything yer doing and make it yer Goal In Life to acquire it. He also was producer on the film version of A Series of Unfortunate Events. However, the first 2 episodes of the Netflix show - remember, having read all the books, seen/loved the film, I was SO excited - but the first two episodes were so disappointingly silly. I was shocked! But on episode 3, new director on board, show started to improve. I liked in the show the details alluding to The VFD and Beatrice and other things from the books, but accuracy to the books means little if the show or film can't succeed in being visually delicious and creative, along with the other elements like performance and music. We got two more seasons to go and I can't wait. Olaf as the Gym Teacher and Detective is going to be hilarious.
Ok real quick, I gotta say something. The whole tone of the TV show is much darker. There are bits of comedy, but overall it's a much darker story and feel. I think maybe your view was caused because the next two seasons weren't out yet, seeing as the next seasons are much darker and more depressing. Edit: also, many things that were wrong with the show in this are also better done and explained in the next two seasons. Would you maybe wanna do another episode comparing it again after seeing the rest? My personal opinion is that while it does tend to be slightly more cartoonish, as the seasons go on the true meaning if the series comes out, and it really does become a tragedy, but the cartoonish parts of it are what made it so unique, and that's mostly why I love it so much.
@@banditoburrito9719 "there's a bit of humour"?? The show is essentially a comedy; it features musical numbers, goofy acting and cartoonish action which is clearly aimed at younger audiences.
@@lukess.s So you are admitting that you can't read between the lines. You only see the surface layer of the show. The show has much more depth. But you won't see it unless you know how to look beyond what you see.
No I'm sorry the show is darker than the film in every facet. Where the film thought that if it dressed everything in a goth and muted tones no one would notice that the actual story was softened on it's edges, the show simply presents everything as it was in the books and the humor and darkness work in tandem, thus why it is a considered a dark comedy, the novels that is and subsequently any adaption of said source material. The film nixed almost every disturbing element from the books. You conveniently don't point out how only in the show do we see monty's corpse or josephine's death. You don't point out how only in the show does Olaf pretend to stab an infant multiple times through a suitcase or how he feels up a 14 year old girl that he plans to marry. Or how when the Olaf of the show slaps Klaus it is played straight without the need to soften it with a joke quickly after. In fact, the show has quite a few somber scenes, but you glossed over and ignored them in your analysis in favor of the films versions of said scenes. Ultimately the film is pretty at first glance but once you spend time with it you realize that it doesn't have all the bite it pretends to have.
The film was never scary. In fact, the film has very few differences in tone when compared to the show. Both the film and the show punctuated their somber moments with comedy, which is fine since the Novels did the exact same thing. The issue with the film is that where the show in the novel may have comedy in them neither pull punches where the film always did. AS already mentioned the film chose to water down a lot of the explicitly dark elements of the novels, not because it was an artistic choice, but because it was produced by nickelodeon which notoriously only produces very safe and family friendly productions. It's not subtle to remove the murder of Gustav and replace it with a joke. That is a deliberate choice to soften the narrative. It didn't add to it nor did create any meaningful nuance, it basically dumbed it down. Film's version of Olaf was far more goofy than the shows. Are you forgetting the raptor scene? Carrey's constant goofy faces and over the top Ace Ventura Mannerisms? To each their own of course and you are entitled to your opinion of both, but I firmly believe the show is far superior to the film on any given day.
Daniel Booyah i agree with You , i love both the series and the movie but i prefered the series because is more like the books , more scarier, more interesting , there is more misteries , and i prefered NPH 's count olaf because he is more true to the character than jim carrey . I think that jim carrey is better of playing goofy characters , ,NPH. Has done a wonderfull job such as the Rest of the cast of the series .Im not saying that i didnt like jim carrey 's performancce just that i prefered Neil Patrick Harris version .In the movie there is a los of mistakes like the fact that Klaus didnt have glases (wich makes it impossible for klaus be hipnotized in the miserable mill ) and that the marriage scene is after the Baudaleires being in the care of aunt Josephine
Norella Zuniga also in the books klaus has glasses and in the movie he did not have glasses. But in the series he did. Neil Patrick Harris ( The Netflix series) is better then The Movie. HEH, BEAT THAT JIM CARREY!
i feel like Benny brings up exactly what makes the movie darker in my opinion, the characters feel real. sure in the show you see the gruesomeness of Monty's dead body, but you never really saw his as anything more then the goofy wonka type cartoon, you never really feel what it would be like to lose him because theres no possible way to connect to a person that doesnt exist in real life. i feel like the show takes its darkness almost ironically, just look at the ways the narrator warns us about the unfortunate nature of the show and of the movie, it might just be me but the delivery in the show just feels alot like pure sarcasm as opposed to the quite serious tone that it brings to the film.
I do. I never really saw the movie but from the comparison that he did i think that those of the show are better. I am still in the middle of season 2.
@Carson Elias I'm 27 and autistic, what you may find funny I see childish jokes that make no sense. The film is more to my liking because the comedy isn't forced and is delivered in the right way, so I think it's childish compared to what the book presented it as.
I feel like the show is way more accurate and quotes the book exactly but also adds more to the story and fills up plotholes and answers more questions towards the books
At first I was doubtful of the series because the movie was such a nostalgic masterpiece for me, but I loved the show adaptation because they perfectly portrayed what happened in the books and it feels like the viewers also grew with the characters and they're so endearing tbvh
I personally prefer the series better. You say it doesn't show much emotion and bases more of the comedy side, but I think both are in it and mean a great deal. The comedy can make other characters horrified or sad. And as for the emotional side, I think there is a lot. The evil, the good, the sadness, the shock, deaths, escapes, realisations, accidents, findings, all burst with emotion. It really made me feel for it. The movie wizzed through things I found. It didn't go through things with detail, or emphasize things, like the series did
I actually think the series has far more emotional depth than the movies, it just doesnt sacrifice humor for it. Its more stylized and dry and subtle and pervasive and ultimately darker. Also the video tries to say that the restaraunt scene is unnecessary, but it sets up a lot of things for the VFD introduction that becomes increasingly more vitally important. I'm not sure this guy read the books.
I actually think I like the movie more, which is odd because I'm usually prone to liking more recent things first lol. But ig its hard to compare, because the series sets up more mystery and kind of backstory (especially now that the last season of it's out)
I like the movie better, but that’s just my opinion. I like it’s style more, and because I had read the first few books and seen the movie, the first episodes of the show were kinda boring. I think Carrey’s Count Olaf was more sinister, and I don’t think that the more accurate, the better. I want to see an artist’s interpretation of the books, otherwise I would read the books again. Unfortunately, most artists interpretations suck ( I have zero hope for the Artemis Fowl movie). However Coralline and a few others are some exceptions. I also think Jude Law is a better Lemony Snicket ( though he looks less like the real Lemony,) All the casting for the movie was great actually.
nothing will beat the ending of the movie. watching their brilliant house turn into nothing was so heartbreaking and them finally reading the letter their parents had sent but never got back to them brilliant. gutted that they didn’t make sequels
alex the ending of the movie is the ending of the first book...which is just kinda weird. Also the movie never really cares to go after the mystery of the "eye" which is actually the three letters "VFD". VFD is a huuuge part of the actual plot and so is snicket and his brother that is killed by Olaf. The movie is nice but is missing 90 percent of the story. They couldn't have made a sequel because they messed up the entire story line, missing the majority of the books and putting some parts in the wrong order. Also the musical number ISN'T THE END. It's the end of the first season (the first four books). There is a second season and the last one will come out. Also at the end at the second season they also have help..since everyone one is talking about how one of the parents survived. I used to watch the movie all the time and I loved it but after watching the series, it's like they are making thier own story. It's not a bad movie but they totally ruined the story in comparison to the books.
I feel like people who prefer the show are coming from a place of reading the books and expecting to be satisfied. The movie is a clearly better piece of audiovisual work, is just superior quality wise. While the show is more willing to tell the things that happened in the books, and has more time to it. The movie and the show have different purposes, to please audience and to make a film.
I saw the film for the first time las year and haven't felt the need to watch the series becouse it was never gonna live up to how much I like the movie. But I am going to start listening to the audio books soon and after reading the comment section I think I might want to watch the series afterwards. From my own experience until now I think you are spot on!
I agree with him 100% movie was way better. The show was shallow and childish but was aesthetically pleasing with good music. The tone is better in the movie, darker, better acting, and not cheesy (unlike the show). Biggest difference imo, is how the show mostly targets kids, while the movie targets young adults. That's mostly why I like the movie better - which I think alings better to the vision of the books.
The netflix show is more like the books. The more eccentric tone helps it in later installments, where it can clash with serious moments (In a good way)
I find the to movie to be better then the show as much as I find the show a bit too silly and the books get much darker later on (book 5 and 6 being the turning points). The show is closer to the story of the books though but the movie tone and character portrayal are better, well at least in my opinion.
I'd like a series in the style of the movie. Both leave me slightly unsatisfied. That said, I appreciate both for their respective (exclusive) qualities.
The series was a lot better because it has higher entertainment value, deeper connection with the characters since they have longer screen time, and damn I just want to point out how great Neil is as Count Olaf. He was definitely made for the role.
I wasn't sure if I'd like the show, mostly because I couldn't really imagine NPH as Count Olaf, but in the end, I absolutely loved it. The way they did Snicket's narration was incredible. The random musical numbers, which I thought would be annoying, were actually such a great addition to the show. I got genuinely attached to some of the guardians and losing them was painful (especially Monty). The dry humor and wit, along with the deeper moments of introspection, really follow the tone of the books (I know, some people don't care about that, but I loved that aspect of the books, so having it in the show was such a boon). I also love the fantasy aspect and how beautifully it was filmed. You also see a bit more character development in the children, guardians, and in random side characters (like some of the minions and random VFD members). I know that many of these things are because the show is much longer than the movie, and the show wasn't perfect by any means, but I just liked it better. Also... unpopular opinion but I don't really like Jim Carrey and didn't like him as Count Olaf. Pls don't hate me.
I personally think the television is more faithful and enthralling. This is also coming from a girl who refused to watch it when it came out because of her love for the film.
My own personal thought on the two adaptations aside... a closer adaptation to the source material doesn't automatically constitute a superior product.
Aubree Grossman I agree with you on that. But nostalgia still doesn't automatically make something better. 2 great examples of this are the adaptations of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and The Shining.
Aubree Grossman To an extent I do agree with the long for vs short form aspect, but it's not like that's a hard rule. I actually call back on my example of the Shining as a perfect example, it's also a good example of superior and inferior products since there's a much more noticeable difference in quality between the 2. In case you're unfamiliar, Stephen King hated Kubrick's film so he worked to get a miniseries started. This series followed the book almost to a T and suffered for it greatly. Kubrick understood that when adapting something from a written to a visual medium, things need alteration to fit a visual medium. That being said though, this problem doesn't manifest itself nearly as much in the series of unfortunate events.
Aubree Grossman No problem, the biggest flaw I see in the Netflix unfortunate events is that the pacing sometimes comes to a snail's crawl. Should there be other problems that stem from the aspect of being a super faithful adaptation I'd have to rewatch the series with the intend of finding them.
Dominic Uccelli I agree but when adapting a series of books especially, accuracy to not just the plot elements but the tone and method of storytelling can better accentuate the plot. The movie was nice, but the difference in tone and events would not fit the longform story of the series. The show can't resolve the last episode of the season like the movie did because it's not the conclusion of the story! The most satisfying conclusion has to be at the very end of the tale. The movie and the show are so different in format and their aims, its difficult to compare them and easily pick which was better. According to this channel, the movie was better for those who want to see a movie and aren't as familiar with the events of the books. For fans of the books and those who are watching a television series, the show satisfies more in that area.
In case I wasn't quite clear in my initial post, I'm not calling which is better between the film or the series. Truth be told I'm far from being able to make that decision. My aim was more to address all the comments below that conflate book accuracy with quality. In terms of the movie not fitting the long form story... you're right. But I also don't think that was ever the intention. When I think back on how the events of the film transpired, I'm left thinking that the team wanted that story to be self contained. A deliberate decision was made to bookend the film with the events of Bad Beginning which did a lot to tell a cohesive and self contained story. Add to that the fact that they simply can't go to the events of Miserable Mill from where the film ended and the fact that some form of closure was given when they revisited the remains of the house, along with the film's explanation for the fire, plenty of signs exist suggesting that they wanted to tell just the one story and leave it with a somewhat open end. Secondly, I will concede that a closer adaptation very often leads to a more satisfying product, but that's the optimal word... satisfying. Again, not speaking in specific regards to this series, but satisfying and superior aren't exactly synonyms. When I hear satisfying, I think of the product appealing to nostalgia. Yeah direct translations of the book events are gonna be more satisfying because it's a much more familiar product, it appeals to the sense of nostalgia and familiarity which gets you down deep. As a contrast, alterations may not be as satisfying but are able to provide what can very easily end up as better moments. An example I love is in the later Harry Potter novels/films, more specifically, Phoenix to Hallows. One of the big changes made between the page and the screen was that the main trio were treated more like adults. They were doing thing and having agency more than in the books where we saw a lot more adolescent angst and playing back seat to characters like Dumbledor who were really out there getting things done.
It was supposed to be a darker version. But the breaking of the 4th wall and the obvious I'm a terrible villain jokes, or any jokes at all ruin it. Its supposed to be, this is a terrible story. These people aren't listening to the kids. This is a terrible man. Nobody can see through his acting and disguises. There is no hope for these children. I feel like I watching Bugs Bunny in man form trying to ruin the children's lives. And they're just like, THIS IS RIDICULOUS. And then count olaf agrees with them. I'm excited for the next season, where there can't be a comparison to the movie, because the movie made specific plot choices so the story would end after 3 books because they were too lazy to make it a harry potter style 7 parts movie, squishing a couple of books in at a time.
which is also probably why the shows first season ended with the misirable mill rather then just the first three books. as a statement about the movie.
I don't know if I agree with you about it being a statement about the movie. The movie may have had something to do with it, but more of a making sure people realize they're doing all the books, and not just an elongated version of the movie. If you compare the books to the show/movie, you get a much different opinion of the show/movie than you do if you compare the sow to the movie. The movie was as if someone only read the first 3 books and went, this is cool, we could make this a cool movie. The show was like someone read all the books and then dedicated their entire lives to making it a tvshow, but then had budget issues. the biggest problem with the show is that it is being compared to the movie.
IDK... But the show was much more like the books. Not really believable as an adult but as a child very much so. I remember reading the books and laughing at Olaf rather than being afraid. I mean I was afraid of him at some points but mainly I thought of him as a goofy mean idiot. The books are, in the plot, very dark, but in the voice very light. And that's what the show did. It took a dark plot and played it out in a more light or comedic voice/tone.
I personally hated the movie. Not because of the acting or the mood, that was fantastic! It's just I will never be able to get past the fact that they totally ruined the plot. I am for the show because it stays by the book. In fact, most of the scenes are word for word! If the movie wasn't based off the book and was a stand-alone, than I would like it.
I like the show far more... save for the song at the end of the first season, it was better in every aspect. Olaf's Troupe are supposed to have small redeeming qualities save for Esme Squalor, the movie made all of them complete monsters with no humanity, but the TV Show reveals they have minds of their own, have good qualities, and could be redeemed if they stop letting Count Olaf brow beat them (which eventually they each do in the books, unless they die first). The books need to be factored in, as some decisions and actions are heavily influenced by the books. The reason Count Olaf's disguises work on adults, is because every member of the V.F.D., Olaf included, was trained to have excellent disguise skills, so much so that when the Children end up using the techniques eventually, Olaf, Esme, and other V.F.D. members are just as tricked by them in disguise. There is a theory that Olaf's appearance and 'Lack of acting skill' are Lemony Snicket's own bias perspective (just as how the Harry Potter Books are seen through Harry's own skewed perceptions, so too are A Series of Unfortunate Events viewed through Snicket's biased views on the narrative... remember, Lemony Snicket exists in the World of his stories, and is allegedly telling the tales from accounts and research he's done)
Jerome Davis strongly disagree, as someone who read all 13 of the books i couldnt care less how close the movie was, i think the movie is better in every way, actors, tone, cinematography, music, etc.
Fingers998 The Daily Punctilio, the Volunteers Fighting Disease, and Count Omar would be so happy that you don't care about the true story, enjoy music, and like paying more for less. The movie has Olaf facing all the tortures he brought upon the children, it downplayed the roles of the Troupe, and despite having a big movie budget, it wasted most of the money on just two actors: Jim Carrey and Meryl Streep... and skimped on story. Also, since both use Catherine O'Hara in different roles, your statement becomes weakened, since the movie underused everyone except Carrey.
Fingers998 My sister watched both the series and the movie, and thought that the series was better, and she had never read the books, but my friend, also never reading the books thought the movie was better. I'm just saying we can all have opinions, and that's ok. Just don't go against others saying that they were wrong.
Think you missed the point of the series, pal. It's satire. Big mistake not to consider the source material. The Netflix adaptation is way more faithful to the original tone that made the series unique in the first place.
@@JM-tx6xc it's satire disguised as a children's adventure book with the absurdist subgenre, a subgenre that can be found under tragicomedy, comedy, and tragedy. Before you laugh at others' comments and say "it's not fucking satire lmao" as if they are stupid, please make sure you are correct first. Thank you.
@@thebinlgbtisbabadook7832 Right, of course the series is mocking books who constantly make light of how grim and depressing they are but while being a form of satire, they also told a rich and compelling story. A story that wasn't very well executed in the series. I understand the source material, I just may have misspoken or not interpreted well.
@@JM-tx6xc It's okay, most of the time it's hard to have a decent conversation in the UA-cam comments because of its limitations. We can't explain as much as we want to, and always ended up either misunderstanding others or being minsundertood by others.
The Netflix show is extremely Close to the Book!!!!! There's a reason why the kids were in the Restaurant. They do the exact same thing in the Book!!! It's An amAzing adaptation
Not really, sure some details are there but think of of the stuff that is missing, Mr. Poe Taking them to their new guardians, The stuff that happens that Aunt Josephine is afraid of when the house falls, Klaus going to the optometrists again, and other details, like how Klaus is way shorter than Violet....
Some things that work in one medium don't work as well in another. Just because something follows the source material beat for beat, doesn't by default make it a good adaptation.
daniel ap It does here. The show has done a better job at capturing the essence of the books and source material in a whole. The film made a lot of assumptions and was made while the books where still being published, while the Netflix series has the whole series and the author to work with. And the funny thing about the books is that the transition from page to screen actually works really well.
I actually feel the slower pacing for the series was almost perfect as it introduced so many details and plots, esp about the volunteers and the past. It made me want to rewatch episodes to catch details leading to the ending. I think the only time I skipped scenes were during vile villagers and Mr poe's obnoxious ness
"The series failed to give emotional depth." Did you really watched it? In the movie Olaf's henchmen were portrayed as just a bunch of blind dumb sheep. In the series we get to learn that they can actually think for themselves but failed to see that they deserve better than him, and we felt sorry for them, even understand them. All characters are multi-dimensional in the series, but one-dimensional in the movie. Olaf in the movie is portrayed as a flat general common average villain, just all out plain bad guy born evil. In the series, if you are a good film critic, you will notice how neil p harris was able to manifest pain behind Olaf's eyes, hinting you that everything he is doing is because he has been hurt by the people closest to him in the past, even before you knew his backstory. He is a human. He is relatable. And because he is relatable, he affects your emotion. If you are the kind of film critic that not only looks at the cinematography and the whatever but ALSO looks at a film as a whole, you will see how deep the tv series is and how layered it is compare to the film. I like both versions but you seemed biased. I do respect your opinion as this is YOUR review, but please next time review wisely and professionally, review without biased. I only looked biased in this comment because I want to point out the negative things about the movie that you didn't point out, and the good things about the series that you didn't point out.
Bear in mind this was only released when series 1 was out. As I recall the henchmen were still pretty basic characters with no thoughts for themselves.
@@lukebeforeyougame145 Bear in mind that even in S1 the Henchperson With No Indeterminate Gender was already giving bits of epiphany speeches (that Olaf usually interrupts so we don't get to focus on them). The Women With White Faces also ask questions compare to the women in the movie whenever Olaf's plan is, you know, not so thought through.
@Kenneth Sigua who? NitPix? Nah I think his head just needs a little shaking and rattling from his fellow film critics to pour out all the biases from his ears haha 😂 he got good movie reviews sometimes.
I think hes talking about mr poe And S2/S3 are out and *spoiler warning* the henchmen leave count olaf when he wants them to throw sunny of mount frott And fernald (hookie) reunites with his sister fiona in sonething grotto Their not simple minded blank slaves DUDE (To the maker of the review cuz I forgot the channles name)
You have to look at it Logistically too. The show had three season to display emotional depth but the film only had about 1hr20mins. He can only compare what is the same between the shows which is the first 6 episodes and I feel the film did better. However, overall the series was better, when you take into account of everything.
CGI/dummy Sunny in the series is for comedic effect (playing poker, sanding a rock etc), whereas in the film its just glaringly obvious for no real reason.
The reason you are saying this is because you watched all 13 episodes of the series. When he made this, there were only four, therefore you could not get used to the way they played it out. Also, if you do consider the source material then the movie seems more tragic. When you watch the TV show, remember there are musical numbers. When you hear music, you want to keep listening. Therefore, you would watch the show over and over and become more fond of it. Then you would make up some excuse to say that the TV series is better. As I said at the beginning, there are now 13 40 minutes episodes to watch. So you watch some episodes, some other episodes would seem like you have not watched them for a while. And when it feels like you have not watched it for a while you will watch it again. Then you would hear more musical numbers and as I said before become more fond of the series. And you don’t have to wear glasses to be intelligent.
@@monicastanden1216 well we have opinions? I watched the movie and just recently watch the Netflix series once and i loved the Netflix adaptation the most.
One of the big themes in the books from my understanding is that Lemony Snicket doesn't want you to view/read the story, as it is too tragic and unfortunate. The long dragged out scenes from the TV show don't only foreshadow future events, but they are also accurate to the books. They drag out the story to make it require more patience, like a test of willpower for the viewer. Also, Patrick Warburton's Lemony Snicket is the best portrayal I could possibly imagine. I cannot think of a singular actor that could fit the character better.
Juatin Bonds Games you are right. now that I've watched more episodes, I think they've got the details right. the only thing I really miss is Jude Law being Lemony Snicket. i loved his voice narration. But hey, we've all got different preferences. heh
@@mothercoconuts4109 As explained in the video and in various comments, the series take the story in a much different tone. If they had made a series to continue what the film had built, and to get the fans back, they would have made it in the same tone, probably even darker, and certainly not in such a different approach. The series doesn't answer or completes the movie, but works independently.
@@Raphael-2 I'm not talking about the tone, neither were they. I was saying that if you wanted the movie to be in separate sections that's why they made it a series?
I watched the series and the movie and I like how the series makes the scenes longer bc when I watched the movie I was like it over already over and the most annoying thing for me was was Klaus did not were glasses so in my opinions like the series more
I haven’t seen the movie, but I definitely enjoyed the series. I never really found the pacing to be a problem, as I really liked just being in the unique atmosphere of all the locations they go to. I also don’t really think the show was all that comical. Maybe it wasn’t as serious as the movie, but there were definitely some gut-wrenching moments in there.
Something that not too many people understood is that when the aunt Josephine's house was falling down in the movie, a door knob actually exploded, just like aunt's fear
I think we caught onto how her biggest fears are ultimately the reason the house collapses in the first place. Even with the refrigerator almost smushing them.
@@kim-hendrikmerk4163 One of the Baudelaire kids were actually reciting some of the stuff Josephine said, it shows they're aware of Josephine's fears have all come true.
A Series of Unfortunate Events was the first book series I ever read. So growing up with the Jim Carrey movie I loved it, but was disappointed with how much story was actually missing, I told my aunt once when I was a child "I want to see more in a movie or a tv show or something" which brings us to the Netflix series. When I found out that it was going to be a thing, I was so excited to see what they would do. And in my opinion I absolutely love it. I love the books, I love the movie and I love the TV series. It's really hard to compare them because of how different they all are, but I love them for the individual works of art that they are. Thank you Lemony Snicket (DH) for this amazing series. I'm almost 22 and I started reading these books when I was about 8, I have even got "The world is quiet Here" and the VFD on my left ankle.
I love the series but the movie is a masterpiece. It’s literally perfect. If anything I just wish they finished the whole series with that cast and crew
they tried but the child actors were busy (especially emily browning) and by the time they freed up they had aged too much to continue playing those roles. the show did a better job casting them anyways tho
@@BoraCM I disagree, I thought the movie took its source material way too seriously, while the series managed to strike the perfect balance between ridiculousness and actual mystery and suspense, just like the books. Plus half the episodes were written by the actual author of the books himself sooooooo
As someone who loved the books growing up, the Netflix series may be closer to the books and a stronger adaption overall, but I personally prefer the movie, perhaps for nostalgic reasons. I loved the cast and loved Jim Carrey’s Count Olaf so much that as a young girl, I found him equally hilarious and scary, and I suppose it was hard to top that for me. I do like Patrick Warburton’s narrating though. He just has a fun tone haha.
Yes, the acting in the tv series is supposed to be very wooden and exaggerated at the same time, but honestly the fact that it was on purpose doesn't make it better. It still makes it all feel very fake and surreal, and hard to get into for a lot of fans, myself included. The more realistic acting in the movie appeals to me more, as a longtime fan of the books, and I'd really been hoping the tv show would take those elements from the movie. But alas, they obviously didn't.
I like the series better. I read that the author wrote a script for the film but the studio didn't use it. Netflix welcomed the author's participation in the creation of the series. According to friends that read the book this shows. The main difference is tone and pacing. The humor of the series makes for a more enjoyable experience. While trying to squeeze 3 books into 1hour and 48 minutes runtime is ridiculous. It made for a very confusing mess of a film. The ending of the movie felt like things were going to get better . While the series stuck to the narrative that this is doomed to end badly. Patrick Burton's take on deadpan narrator Lemony Snicket is great listen to. With his mini essay on the English language to entertaining.
you can't go around and say people suck, I honestly agree, the show was a bit better in the way they twisted the plot, but on the other hand the film had a much better way on handling tone and the actions of a certain character.
Not only did they not use the script, but they fired Daniel Handler. Which was unfortunate, seeing as HE'S the writer of the books they were trying to adapt..
When I was about 5 or 6 my grandmother told me if I rode my bike too fast a piece of metal would fly off and hit me in the eye. Being so young I actually believed that garbage. So if you were wondering, yes, there really are people like Aunt Josephine.
The Netflix version feels more true to the theme, emphasizing the absurdist elements of the story for comedic and story-telling effect. I think the story is far too convoluted and campy to work well as a serious film (as the film tried more so to do), but works excellent as a slightly dark absurdist comedy. The only thing I really miss from the film is the 'Drive Away' piece by Thomas Newman during the credits... was such a good piece, wish it'd somehow made it into the Netflix version in some capacity, heh.
Totally. I didn't even want to watch the movie as a kid, because it was just so depressing. Without the cartoon-ish feeling and the over-the-top comedy, you're just watching some guy tell you that bad things are going to happen, and then they do.
I haven't read the books in a while, but I recall the tone being rather depressing throughout. Yes there was an absurdist overtone throughout to help lighten the mood, but the story is overall rather dark. It's literally called a series of unfortunate events. And in that regard, the film is more faithful.
In the movie, Klaus and Violet legit look like siblings. Amazing casting for all characters tbh. If the movie was a show instead, it would've been gold. Every book was so rushed into 1 movie. The show was so childish and cartoony, even though it was supposed to be bleak? Doesn't make sense
The movie was something I related to as a child. About the cruelty of the world. I went through some things. I got what Klaus said about home being where your parents are actually doing their job. It's not home if that's not happening. Something about the movie is more true. It's more real.
I grew up with the same thoughts. I still call the movie my favourite. My suggestion: watch the movie and then watch the second and third season it worked for me and just made me happy overall
I feel like that whole rule about which you watch first really applies here, for most of us. I also get the impression that younger teens like the series while older audiences (be they adults now or younger when they watched it) prefer the movies. One thing I will say is that I loved both Count Olafs (although I do have a favorite), and even the Lemony Snickets nearly tie for me.
i grew up with the books and the show is so much better than the movie. the show does great justice to the books and many of the negatives for the show you said are parts of the books. i guess growing up and reading the books over and over makes me love the show way more. the movie just frustrates me
I agree. This book was the first time I have ever truly enjoyed reading, the Movie moved way too fast leaving less time for character development. It was frustrating and not satisfying. I haven't finished the series, but so far I love how they take their time with each character. The series also has it's share of deep sad moments, but I also love it's "cartoon-y" feel.
I did did grow up with the books but I liked the movie I didn't mind much of the differences because the performances were pretty good and I love the narrator he sounded like how my teacher would read the books to us. Putting a tad bit more inference on clues and meanings. Honestly I haven't seen the show but how he explained I can see why people enjoy it but I like the movie better because it gets to the point and the points are hit not half bad. I only had one gripe with the movie tho it was the ending alittle bit. It went by alittle fast but IG it did the ending alittle justice. But in summary I read the books ,enjoyed the movie (despite a few flaws) but haven't seen the show but again I can see why people enjoy the show based on this videos analysis of both of em.
my wife was obsessed with the books as a kid. so when i raised questions about things like "why is mr poe a complete idiot?" or " whats with all the stopping and explanations with snicket?"...... well she bought the complete set of unfortunate events, and i get it. appreciate the show much much better. the whole review here seems one sided honestly
In the tv show Monty actually does meet Olaf, in season 2 that just came out they show years back when all of the relatives knew each other and they all knew count Olaf then.
They weren't talking about the show. They were saying that he doesn't know him in the movie. And they mentioned it because it makes the movie seem a bit more realistic. In the show, Monty doesn't realize it's Olaf until a bit later, but he should've immediately realized it.
I feel like this video would be generally very different now that the 3rd season is out. Olaf's character development personally blew my mind, the whole storyline got so much more interesting...
I feel like the style shouldve been like a mix between the movie and TV show. Very dark and sad, but still light hearted and surreal. I always got that impression from the books.
The newer episodes are all very funny, but goes very deep too. I actually cried when Olivia dies in episode 8 season 2 because the TV series made you love her so much, and then SNAP. She's gone.
As a fan of the books, they're both very good. However, the film's problems wouldn't be apparent until future films were starting to roll out. In their haste to adapt three novelettes into one film, they dropped a lot of plot points that are seemingly insignificant, that become very important later on. They would have to go back and drastically change the later installments to get it to work. Not to say it couldn't be done and be done well, but it certainly would have been a lot more work to get it right. The television series took its time, but that's because the books took their time. They're far more faithful adaptation to the books. And by going slow, they're not going to run into the same issues that movies would have. They are able to put these small things in there that would become important later on.
I wish they had created sequels to the film 😔 I waited my entire childhood for the next one. I liked the darker tone and the actors being more serious. I was excited for the series but I fell off it after the second season
This video is terrible. My content is way better.
No it's not, you only have two crappy videos, 819 subscribers, and your username is literally DikPix. So yeah, I'm pretty sure your content is the furthest thing from better.
Oh honey...
DikPix did you come to this vid to literally just advertise yourself with 3 Star Wars videos (that variety is astounding by the way)
Really people? Can’t you tell he’s being sarcastic? Why else would Nitpix pin his comment?
@Mia C Oh Honey...
The anxious clown scene with captain sham is important as it introduces Larry your waiter as a volunteer...
That Kerby-Pinguet Nerd that’s what I said
I wish he was nervous and said “hello waiter your Larry”
I was looking for this comment 😂 but I assume the person didn’t see the next two seasons
@@triniroma4957 the next 2 seasons didn't exist when the video was made, and hence it is understandable that the review has no reference to them.
Joseph Strong yea I know that 💀😂
The Baudelaires in danger 24/7, Mr. Poe’s reaction: Coughs
A crow dies, Mr Poe’s reaction: SOMEONE GET THIS CROW TO A VET!!!!!!!! *and really cares*
"It's a RAVEN" -- one of poe's kids whose name I forget
In a way, Mr Poe is a villain. He only realises the danger after they are nearly killed each time. Yet he makes the same mistake after the same mistake. It's as if Olaf drugged Mr Poe with something to always make him cough and forget they are in danger.
Gloria Li in the show the adults are the true villains (not including VFD).
KudaKeileon, Edgar and Albert. I’m pretty sure. Meh
@@KudaKeileon I think Albert
Having seen the full Netflix series and the movie, my opinion is if they series and the movie could get married and have a child, that child would be the absolute perfect representation of the books.
Both were great. :)
Bethany Urry #word #sotrue
Absolutely agree. I think the series was very good, but what would be perfection is if it included the things that made the movie better, like the movie Aunt Jo and movie Poe and the movie’s music score and Jim Carrey as Count Olaf (as much as it pains me to say it I think he was better...Neil Harris just doesn’t scare me, and if Carrey had been directed better and told to be more scary and less whacky, he would’ve nailed it completely)
I agree. The movie would definitely save the series from its overly comedic and idiotic nature in my opinion.
@@staindink_7776 I like Carrey's wackiness. I know it's not faithful to the original, but it gives the movie a breath of fresh air from my standpoint.
Bro my biggest turnoff from Carrey’s wackiness was the over abundance of it. It’s definitely good at some points, like for the points when you really need to hate him, and ESPECIALLY at the points when he’s doing characters like Stephano. But there were parts in the movie when he was God awful terrifying and not so wacky, like when he leaned into the car to whisper into the Baudelaires as Poe was taking them away...those moments of his that Harris could never live up to. And I would have just loved to see more of that. At the end of the day, Olaf needs to be viewed more as a villain in my opinion. And too much wacky makes me wanna love him and find him hilarious, when the whole point is for me not to love him.
The “do you have a hall pass?” scene scared the crap out me when I first saw it. The way he doesn’t seem to move and the way the lighting is, as well as the joke and voice give off a very creepy and unsettling tone
Did you see the knife in his hands?
They made sure he was holding the knife and it glints in the moonlight.
Weird, what you guys found creepy i found the funniest parts. I died laughing
i was 5 when i watched that in fact in down a rabbit hole with the moive now that i remember it. But yeah that gave me nightmares for a while
very unsettling
One thing that struck me about the show is how similar Klaus and Violet look to their movie counterparts. Especially Violet. They had to have gone out of their way to do that.
Charles Jones they went off how the book describes the characters and how they look. That’s why they look alike because both adaptations tried to get people similar to what the books desribed
Ignacio Zelaya I highly doubt the book went deep into bone structure
It was just their haircut .
@@nahitsdragon9873 it's not just cheeks it's pretty much how the shape of their faces are very similar cause even if u followed the description of the books u could still end up with different looking people
Yeah I was like
"Oh wow" because they both must've had reaaalllly good costume designers
Mr.Poe pissed me off in the TV show on so many levels
Yes. Very book accurate. A completely useless idiot. But so are all adults in the series, you will get much worse adults than poe in the next season.
I know but the one in the movie made sence. The one is the show should be locked up for mental instability
Instead he gets promoted, but such is life, eh?
Hmmmmm -_-
American Berserker I mean thats how he was in the books so whatevs
The movie was an unfinished story. Having existed any sequel and it would have been a better match for a comparison with the show.
Not really the film made a huge mistake on little yet extremely important details like Clause having no glasses, the glasses are important to the plot of the story and also they left out certain characters etc
I feel the movie, though lacking and sometimes mistaking in details and at time not following the book to the dot, does fluster my memory and yet do allow some new imagings in my thoughts - which then surprisingly lead me back to reading the book again and rediscovering things and rereading lines that has new meaning, being much older now...
As a graphic designer, the film’s visual contrast is perfection and the coloration which bring the mood is hmmmmmmmmmmmm, so good. Although, I do love the pastel effects that lead me into a more surrealistic somber tone when played along with the music, jokes and Harris’ deadpan face...
I love both of the adaptations, but when in doubt... the book and your brain will take you to a much richer place. But that’s just me...
And to add, we have a few missed YA movie adaptations- this one, The Golden Compass, Spiderwick, and the more urban-looking but still has some ‘period-plot’ Mortal Instrument. Ooo... Beautiful Creatures.
They knew there wouldn't be a sequel when they shot it. Jim Carrey hasn't done a sequel since Dumb and Dumberer.
@@billlupin8345 Actually, they wanted to make sequels and Carry expressed interest. However, it didn't make enough money despite being based on a popular book series and featuring actors like Carry and Meryl Streep.
the series is truer to the book. you said that the whole peppermint allergy, poe reading the note, restaurant thing was too dragged out, but that’s what happened in the book.
It also introduced one of the first friendly VFD characters to the kids, that scene was super important!
He also said it doesn’t matter what one is more accurate to the book he’s just talking about which one is better
MonsterousXXL yes, but i’m just saying that while he says the movie is better, i think the series is better because it’s more accurate. that’s just my opinion :)
Yes, because everything in a book adapts perfectly to the screen and nothing should ever be changed.
The point of a live action adaptation is not to be exactly like the source material, but to be visually believable and interesting while respecting the source material. I've watched the series, read the books and watched the movie and I still like the movie better because while it's not 100% true to the books, the visual effects, the storytelling and the tone (the whole adaptation itself) make it easier for me to take it seriously. Every character is likeable and you understand what they're all about just by looking at them.
Accuracy doesn't mean it's better.
i feel like you point out all of the positive in the movie and the negative in the series
I felt the same way
Probably because everybody has been pointing the negative of the movie and only the positive of the show...
I agree, I love the series and I feel like he isn't giving it enough credit.
Ikr
Agreed
I actually like how slow paced the series is. I feel like the way the show drags on and moves slowly is actually very appealing and a nice way to torture my poor soul by watching these kids getting into worst situations by the second. For me, it really accentuates the whole "unfortunate" aspect of their current situation. Same goes for how incredibly dumb Mr. Poe is!
Absolutely well said. Show makes the situation feel so much more tragic. I don't agree when someone says the show is too cartoony and humorous. It is actually very, very dark, but you have to look at it deeper. I personally think the show sometimes is indeed way too streched, but I still 100% prefer it over the movie.
And when I first watched the TV show, I was honestly amazed by how much it can irritate, but somehow in a good way. Mr Poe is such a fking dumbass. I think I was close to screaming when I was watching it. XD And it really makes you feel the pain, the tragedy and the injustice of those events. It's even better with next seasons.
Well this is lat but I both liked and disliked It j really liked that snicket was narrating and how slow it moved but in some cases I feel the episodes could have been a little shorter
I agree with this 100%.💯
Exactly
Exactly, like they deliberately used time & inconvenience as a good plot device. It's low level self aware nuanced meta which made me feel WAY more immersed in the show. Like I already loved it from episode 1 but the fact that I genuinely thought the show was over multiple times and yet every time they gave me another reason to dread the next episode but desperately want to see what lies ahead.... it's impressive
Mr. Poe in the show is really good. He’s soo irritating that it works
Yess oh my god I was really ready to fight him but he was just so funny I both will miss and not miss him lol
I never wanted to punch a character SOOO much. The actor did wonders to the character
This whole is irritating
Oh please the movie did a way better job setting up characters and development. This show clearly casted as much black people as possible cause they had to rather then cast based on skill.
There were only two major characters that were black and one small family. The actors for Aunt Josephine and Mr. Poe did a good job. Are you being an idiot or racist?
"Mr. Poe is an idiot, never listens and is completely irritating" so it's just like the books.
Somehow the person in the video doesn't realize that that's LITERALLY the whole point of the character...
He's a Naive adult who thinks he knows better than the children because he's an adult and they're children.
I woudn' say that. I think the actor does a great job being Mr. Poe.
Exactly
That doesn’t mean it’s enjoyable…
@@AnInkStick he's not supposed to be an enjoyable character though?
I wish Klaus would have whispered in Josaphens ear and said "it's free real estate
Underated comment
@@Happy_Shopper that is a fact
It’s free real estate.
cring ebruh cringe cringe
@@gbutterboy It's a meme
I will say I learned way too many words in this show lmao
i learned so much in this show than in school
well, you obviously didn't learn grammar, because damn u need to go back to year 1 and learn the difference between to, two and too
The Gamer Brothers my bad let me fix it
same like "memento mori" which im happy to know that cause i know unus annus
@@synth3662 yesss and I'm sad I only discovered this show after unus annus is gone :(
The one thing that the other film doesn't have is...
Esmé Gigi Genevieve Squalor
E G G S
Yah and cake sniffer
I love this community
@@heghoge4639 as soon as I finished I couldn't look away
@@destroyworldorder Cake sniffing orphans in the orphans in the orphan shack
The next two seasons of the show makes everything so much more sad, everybody freaking dies.
Istg
totally agree
larry deserved better also I feel so smart for figuring that Beatrice didn't really die
@@caula4222 did u just complete the show
@@caula4222 WHAT SHE DOSENT?!
the film has its perks but the show is undeniably more accurate to the books.
Obviously, since the film crammed 3 books into 90 minutes and had to end it after that. Apparently there was a sequel film planned after the first one was released, but that never happened unfortunately.
"unfortunately." I see what you did there.
Unfortunately is a word which here means unsuccessful or unlucky.
whoiswillo I see what you did there too.
We know what Unfortunately means.
Here's the difference:
The show is doing a much better job at getting the books' story right.
The movie did a better job of setting the tone and mood which was awesome but the story was extremely rushed and sometimes painful to watch.
THANK YOU FOR NOT BEING BIASED I LOVE YOU
I agree with you, but I also feel like some of the bit characters were WEIRDLY casted in the show. Principle Nero, Aunt Josephine, the a lot of Count Olaf's henchpeople besides Fernald come to mind. On the other hand, they got a lot of the main characters right, so I guess it evens out.
This is probably most accurate.
@@stephenskinner7207 absolutely! The kids are all very well cast in the show but there are some questions other castings. The movie castings are perfect I think.
@@stephenskinner7207 I think it is because in the books a majority of the characters were originally white and with the movie industry wanting to be more progressive they switched out some of the originally white characters and threw in an actor of color for more diversity. Don't get me wrong, I am fine with watching a show with diversity but when a book describes a person to have say "red hair and green eyes" but the movie producers hire someone who has "black hair and blue eyes" it can be frustrating to the die hard fans that like the book and the movie to be the same. Also Mr. Poe was described to be a fat shorter man but the show hired a fit tall man which was frustrating to me, not the fact that he was black but that he wasn't the described physique.
I read the book series as a kid and I enjoyed both adaptations, but I do like the Netflix series much more because it has the room for all the little details. I don't care that the series is hard to take seriously, it works like that. A Series of Unfortunate Events is dark, but it's not grimdark, it's supposed to be often be funny. For that reason I think Neil Patrick Harris even has the better Count Olaf.
Jake Stirling I preference the tv series to and I've read all the books and the TVs series is more the same than the film but there both great!
Jake Stirling I completely agree!
Jake Stirling it does have better details that fit the books
I Agree so much!
I agree. I read all the books and really got into them when they came out. I couldn't stand the movie adaptation. They tried to cram too much into such a short amount of time, yet simultaneously wasted precious time on things that weren't even in the books. However, I enjoyed the series adaptation. There was more detail, it was much closer to the books, giving each book basically a films worth of length. I LOVE Neil Patrick Harris's Olaf, I was immediately worried that he wasn't going to be serious enough, as much as I love him as an actor. However, I think he nailed that balance between dark humor and evil that is everything the books were. I really hope they continue this series....I would love to see a film adaptation of Esme Squalor. I dressed up as her in her flame dress one Halloween, one of my favorite characters!
Somehow, despite being largely an ironic comedy, the show's Count Olaf was SO MUCH SCARIER and Lemony Snicket actually made me feel heart broken and world weary. Neil Patrick Harris and _KRONK?_ I mean, mad props to them; who knew?
Excactly
not to mention we finally get Esme and Carmelita. Carmelita to piss us off and Esme to add some style lol
In my opinion, the show purposely made the children's misfortune into a joke to demonstrate how kids are never taken seriously which is a main theme throughout the franchise. People don't see through Olaf's obvious disguises to show that adults see what they want to see, but children are keener and can see things as they are. It's supposed to stress the incompetence and flaws of all the adults around them to demonstrate that adults don't have it all together, and emphasises the kid's awareness and intelligence. It's a bold contrast that emphasises points which I felt was missed in the movie adaptation. It's caricature more than realism. The series elaborates the plot and doesn't leave the viewer with any untied ends or questions (by this I mean questions that aren't to be answered in later series) whereas the movie rushed and changed the plot for constant jam packed action. I don't think it's accurate or fair to judge either adaption against the other without taking into account the plot of the book as it is the source material and an adaptation is supposed to bring the source material to life. We also must not forget that its target audience is children, and by adding more humour and lightheartedness to the show it makes it easier for children to stomach and connect with characters, and helps them retain interest in the show, all the while keeping the dry and sarcastic undertones of the original material
The series isn't about kids vs adults, it's about morality.
Regardless of whether the characters are good or bad in the books they are generally useless or their life's work ends up being nothing. The only exceptions are the kids but not because they are children, it's because they approach things differently.
The good guys hide in secret societies yet are revealed to all throughout the series
The bad guys are open about their evilness (when they are honest vs the lies of the good guys) but easily get by due to disguises.
And then in the middle you have the three children who aren't showed to really be good or bad. They are shown as being basically emotionless in every medium because they represent the moral grey area/subjective morality. The bad guys aren't bad and the good guys aren't good because the good guys have terrible things they did in their pasts same as the baddies and most of the baddies have tragic backstories that set them on their current course.
Perhaps that is a deeper analysis of the series. I haven't seen anyone else mention this before, but on a far more literal level, it does demonstrate how kids are not taken seriously. Books are subjective, and there is no right or wrong answer when it comes to what a book is about or what it is representative of. I like your view on it but that doesn't invalidate mine. I started my statement off stating it was my opinion because it is exactly that. I didn't write the books, I didn't produce the series. That's just my take on why it was presented the way it was and that I thought that was how they were trying to tell the story
at least 1 other person mentions the subjective morality theory but yeah, there's probably at the very least the theme of children not being taken seriously in there.
I haven't seen anything but then again I don't avidly read up on it either. It's very interesting though, and adds another layer to the franchise that will make it interesting to rewatch with the theory in mind. Thank you for telling me!
xAdvil is it hard being so lonely all the time? don't you just want to scream for attention?! ugh I know sweetheart it's unbearable, but do try to be quiet... your tantrums are disturbing logical thought, and basic civility. kids these days. amirite?
There can and should be more than one theme to a piece of art. As a wee one I remember reading these books and picking up on the authors cues about how the adults can oftentimes misunderstand or be almost willfully ignorant of the plight, or sorrow, or valid concerns of anyone they don't seem to think is a "grown up" something I think a good number of children feel from time to time. I.e. any and all references to the phrase "parents just don't understand".
As an adult underlying themes whether intentional or not (I vote intentional) can be a "relative morality" as one might put it or how surreal life can be even in the face of great tragedy almost as if the world doesn't even notice you're hurting... because it doesnt.
Either way I enjoyed the show better because like you said it adhered to the source material and it brought to life the nostalgia of reading a great book series. I also felt the tone matched better with the show. very dry but interesting main characters and very excentric but ultimately dull and dimwitted supporting characters.
but hey, that's just my take on it.
Who else died a little inside when the parents weren't actually their parents?
milesandemilyrock spoiler
i cried, i'm alone anyway.
It was clever for those who read the books. They trapped us ! These screenwriters are geniuses ! :)
There was literally no point to them in the slightest except to make the audience feel like shit, which is a shit thing to do to an audience
OJWH yeah, I guess you're right
i absolutely adore how you express your opinion and the way you make your videos is very soothing and satisfying to watch. the narrated parts and the examples from the source are perfectly balanced, your voice is not too loud and it's relaxing to listen to but never boring.
I really needed this type of calm content right now, thank you.
The series is closer to the books, but the movie's aesthetic is *on point*.
The movie is so beautiful
nuh uh,you missed and looked away the point
Daniel Handler (Lemony Snicket) was much more involved with writing and producing the series. So it makes sense that it’s closer to the books. The books have the same humor and tone as the tv show, the movie wanted to go darker and there’s nothing wrong with either. I enjoy both adaptions for different reasons. It’s nice that they are not a carbon copy. Otherwise a remake would be useless.
I know you said this wasn't about which was the better adaption, but the reason I like the series better is because I love the books and it is a better adaption. Because it's such a dark story, people forget that the books are actually hilarious, and I think the series is really similar in tone to the books. The books also do get darker as the story progresses, so I'm hoping the series follows that as well.
Connor Rose That's exactly the reason I got to love the serie. I haven't read the books, but I can notice the way they involve the narrator and I simply love it for the way he breaks the 4th wall.
Honestly, I think that making the story darker is not necessary, it is as dark as it can be, and in the 2nd season it gets worse, as you said.
While i agree there was comedy in the books, it is not to the extent that the netflix series depicts it, which kills it for me. The netflix series is too bright. The fact that they introduce all the details we learn in the last few books about VFD very early on, and as side characters takes away from the bleakness. Instead we are given a lot of hope every episode due to the secretary's involvement. In the books we never have that. it's a lot more bleak of an outlook which makes it creepier and that much more heartwrenching.
Go back and read the books recently. I did a couple weeks back and it makes the movie look like a much better adaptation overall.
Arnoldo Ramón I actually get annoyed with the series telling me how dark and was a scene is supposed to be, then watching it finding is neither very sad nor dark.
Connor Rose can confirm season two is darker. Still with tension breaking comedy though from time to time
Honestly? There's such a thing as Darkness-Induced Audience Apathy. The high points and levity in the netflix series actually do lend the darker points a certain amount of weight that the book series simply lacked as it went on. Every adult character in the books is either evil, incompetent, or dies. It actually helps that there are some people on the Baudelaires' side that are helpful and competent.
I've never read the books, but I must say I like the series better than the movie. The contrast between the comedic tones with the darker themes makes it a more interesting and delicious dish; whereas the movie is rather one-note with its melancholy. I find the depressing aspects of the story more pronounced after you've spent some time laughing at hilarity. Therefore the series is more effective.
Two Rivers Longbow Champion finally someone else agrees with me
Two Rivers Longbow Champion same
I agree, just because series takes a comedic tone, it doesn't mean it's less "dark." The series put the main characters in scenarios of moral ambiguity while the movie puts them as "ah, poor orphans."
A Swaney I totally agree with you and quite frankly I disliked video
It’s closer in tone with the books as well
Wait until the readers of the Daily Punctilio hear about This!
the style of the movie is honestly so beautiful i wish it was longer
yes!!!!
I've been saying this for years.
The movie is one the those things I remember watching over and over again as a child, and it just keeps getting better and better the more I watch it. Just the tone and visuals make me want to cry, it felt so uncomfortable watching NPH being all goofy and quirky after being so enthralled in Jim Carrey.
I actually really loved the movie as a child, it was so dark and mysterious. The show is great but the movie will always have a special place in my heart
I love the tv show better, but there's a 3rd season! it doesn't "end" with a musical number
This was made 2 years ago, there wasn’t a 2nd or third season
I know right
@@hihello607 Either this is a joke or not, I know there is a 2nd and 3rd season. The second season was released in March 30th 2018 and the 3rd season was made in january 1st 2019!
@@puffberiiesx2896 and this video was published in 2017
It was just showing the first season
Actually, I kinda like both, and can't chose what's my favorite.The series has a tone sarcastic and methaphoric that I loved, and, obviously, there's all the history from the books.But the film has this dramatic and scary form, that I love either.Also, the most scenes that I remember enjoy were from the movie.
Your video made me realize that.:)
One thing you didn't discuss was the music. Thomas Newman's score for the film is fantastic and really complements the mood and atmosphere of the film.
The fact is...the movie is not what this story is supposed to be. The tv show created the world that us book fans fell in love with so much better.
exactly!
TheRisenCorpseG Eh....agree to disagree.
The movie is good but the show just captured the soul of the books a lot better.
Dead Bricks Thats all debatable. In my opinion the acting in the movie...particularly from Carey...was horrible. I mean he pretended to be a dinosaur at one point. It was Carey being Carey. And I never felt truly fearful for the kids. I liked some things from the movie...but in my opinion the tv show is a much better adaption.
same
The film captures the spirit of the books and is just made with such better quality, I'd say. I do like both, but everything about the film is produced much better.
The opening of the film "The Little Elf" scene? I thought I was in the wrong theatre when I saw that, but then it turned out to be a total headfake and that was brilliantly hilarious. And that joke kept popping up in the film to remind us!
The MUSIC of the film - composer Thomas Newman's score was worthy of that Oscar nomination, as his music often is.
Olaf's acting troupe is much better in the film. I mean, in the show, they come off as kiiinda bland and irrelevant. A character may be intended to be a boring character but that doesn't mean it should bore the audience. In the film, when the two ladies of Olaf's troupe suddenly appear in the play singing "Nothing in the world can keep the count from his beloved bride!" - they just throw that in our faces and it's jarring but then you realize what's going on and it was hilarious how overtly overconfident/presumptuous Olaf is so that he goes to that length to tell everyone and especially the children that he cannot be stopped. The hook-handed man vs Klaus "I'll make a nice filet outta you!" They all get their moments in the film with solid performances.
And Carrey's Olaf - like this video says - can seamlessly go from silly to menacing to hilarious. For instance when the kids first arrive and ask what's upstairs and Olaf stops in his tracks and slowly looks up and then towards the children with the words: "The TOWER...which You are NEVER to enter....UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES..." giving us a close-up of that Eye. That was genuinely kind of freaky. To us and the children...until he turns around and has to prevent himself from laughing. (Musical score at that moment is also terrific).
The show is food for us fans because we get to see a more literal rendition of the books and so much more of the stories. But where the show fails is keeping things interesting or tonally creative. It becomes monotonous, sometimes. And it's sometimes far too silly, whereas the film has kind of a cap on silliness levels. Mr. Poe and Aunt Josephine are SOOOOO annoying in the show. Josephine's the worst - not because her character demands it, but the actress just goes overboard and isn't believable.
The first two episodes are directed by series producer Barry Sonnenfeld who directed the Men In Black films, Wild Wild West, Get Shorty and produced and sometimes directed the SUPERLATIVE series "Pushing Daisies". If you haven't seen that show, you simply Must drop everything yer doing and make it yer Goal In Life to acquire it. He also was producer on the film version of A Series of Unfortunate Events. However, the first 2 episodes of the Netflix show - remember, having read all the books, seen/loved the film, I was SO excited - but the first two episodes were so disappointingly silly. I was shocked! But on episode 3, new director on board, show started to improve.
I liked in the show the details alluding to The VFD and Beatrice and other things from the books, but accuracy to the books means little if the show or film can't succeed in being visually delicious and creative, along with the other elements like performance and music. We got two more seasons to go and I can't wait. Olaf as the Gym Teacher and Detective is going to be hilarious.
When Aunt Josephine died in the show , I FREAKING CRIED.
Yee
Tommy Cabinbin she was honestly so annoying
She could have pushed him in and drowned him
madame lulu was robbed-
Tommy Cabinbin I cried for three years*
*meaning I cried the entire three seasons
Hookie is the best character. Side note tho, I feel like Neil Patrick Harris's Olaf grows a lot more as he's given 3 seasons to do so.
Ok real quick, I gotta say something. The whole tone of the TV show is much darker. There are bits of comedy, but overall it's a much darker story and feel. I think maybe your view was caused because the next two seasons weren't out yet, seeing as the next seasons are much darker and more depressing. Edit: also, many things that were wrong with the show in this are also better done and explained in the next two seasons. Would you maybe wanna do another episode comparing it again after seeing the rest? My personal opinion is that while it does tend to be slightly more cartoonish, as the seasons go on the true meaning if the series comes out, and it really does become a tragedy, but the cartoonish parts of it are what made it so unique, and that's mostly why I love it so much.
What the hell are you on about? The show is way more comedic than the books, and scenes are often ruined by humour (i.e. The Reptile Room)
@@lukess.s how? There's a bit of humor yeah but nothing insane, and I actually like it
agreed
@@banditoburrito9719 "there's a bit of humour"?? The show is essentially a comedy; it features musical numbers, goofy acting and cartoonish action which is clearly aimed at younger audiences.
@@lukess.s So you are admitting that you can't read between the lines. You only see the surface layer of the show. The show has much more depth. But you won't see it unless you know how to look beyond what you see.
No I'm sorry the show is darker than the film in every facet. Where the film thought that if it dressed everything in a goth and muted tones no one would notice that the actual story was softened on it's edges, the show simply presents everything as it was in the books and the humor and darkness work in tandem, thus why it is a considered a dark comedy, the novels that is and subsequently any adaption of said source material.
The film nixed almost every disturbing element from the books. You conveniently don't point out how only in the show do we see monty's corpse or josephine's death. You don't point out how only in the show does Olaf pretend to stab an infant multiple times through a suitcase or how he feels up a 14 year old girl that he plans to marry. Or how when the Olaf of the show slaps Klaus it is played straight without the need to soften it with a joke quickly after.
In fact, the show has quite a few somber scenes, but you glossed over and ignored them in your analysis in favor of the films versions of said scenes.
Ultimately the film is pretty at first glance but once you spend time with it you realize that it doesn't have all the bite it pretends to have.
The film was never scary. In fact, the film has very few differences in tone when compared to the show.
Both the film and the show punctuated their somber moments with comedy, which is fine since the Novels did the exact same thing.
The issue with the film is that where the show in the novel may have comedy in them neither pull punches where the film always did. AS already mentioned the film chose to water down a lot of the explicitly dark elements of the novels, not because it was an artistic choice, but because it was produced by nickelodeon which notoriously only produces very safe and family friendly productions.
It's not subtle to remove the murder of Gustav and replace it with a joke. That is a deliberate choice to soften the narrative. It didn't add to it nor did create any meaningful nuance, it basically dumbed it down.
Film's version of Olaf was far more goofy than the shows. Are you forgetting the raptor scene? Carrey's constant goofy faces and over the top Ace Ventura Mannerisms?
To each their own of course and you are entitled to your opinion of both, but I firmly believe the show is far superior to the film on any given day.
Daniel Booyah i agree with You , i love both the series and the movie but i prefered the series because is more like the books , more scarier, more interesting , there is more misteries , and i prefered NPH 's count olaf because he is more true to the character than jim carrey . I think that jim carrey is better of playing goofy characters , ,NPH. Has done a wonderfull job such as the Rest of the cast of the series .Im not saying that i didnt like jim carrey 's performancce just that i prefered Neil Patrick Harris version .In the movie there is a los of mistakes like the fact that Klaus didnt have glases (wich makes it impossible for klaus be hipnotized in the miserable mill ) and that the marriage scene is after the Baudaleires being in the care of aunt Josephine
Norella Zuniga I Agree with you too
Norella Zuniga also in the books klaus has glasses and in the movie he did not have glasses. But in the series he did. Neil Patrick Harris ( The Netflix series) is better then The Movie.
HEH, BEAT THAT JIM CARREY!
i feel like Benny brings up exactly what makes the movie darker in my opinion, the characters feel real. sure in the show you see the gruesomeness of Monty's dead body, but you never really saw his as anything more then the goofy wonka type cartoon, you never really feel what it would be like to lose him because theres no possible way to connect to a person that doesnt exist in real life. i feel like the show takes its darkness almost ironically, just look at the ways the narrator warns us about the unfortunate nature of the show and of the movie, it might just be me but the delivery in the show just feels alot like pure sarcasm as opposed to the quite serious tone that it brings to the film.
I agree with all of your points completely and it's those exact reasonings that I prefer the movie a lot more.
Am I the only one who likes the actors in the series better?
I do. I never really saw the movie but from the comparison that he did i think that those of the show are better.
I am still in the middle of season 2.
no, i agree-
Same with me I like the series actors but both are good :)
same. like come on, i’m not racist, but they even changed the races of iconic character such as Mr. Poe and Josephine
I felt as if the characters seemed more open in the show and in the movie It was really ... Boring and just quiet...
I think the Netflix version is better because it’s more mysterious and addictive
@Carson Elias The TV series is too childish with it's delivery in my opinion.
@Carson Elias I'm 27 and autistic, what you may find funny I see childish jokes that make no sense. The film is more to my liking because the comedy isn't forced and is delivered in the right way, so I think it's childish compared to what the book presented it as.
I feel like the show is way more accurate and quotes the book exactly but also adds more to the story and fills up plotholes and answers more questions towards the books
It’s MUCH better
and it's way more true to the books
Fun fact: the person on the right at 9:50 is Daniel Handler, the author of the books
Omfg
Thats amazing
Omg-
@@abeera9237 well, actually that was a pen name. His real name is Daniel Handler:)
Daniel handler is Lemony Snicket-
Cool
In the Netflix series it said:
Camilina: so I don’t have a daddy anymore?
Esme: don’t worry I don’t either
😂😂😂
BIg Rat Jones Da Chungus -Heinz doofenshmirtz-
Shani Mani I’m so confused 🤣 what u sayin, btw I’m on my old acc, it was from ages ago soooo......
Shani Mani you don’t understand how much I love your profile pic
Carmelita: so countie isn’t my daddy anymore?
Esme: he’s not mine either
yessss!
At first I was doubtful of the series because the movie was such a nostalgic masterpiece for me, but I loved the show adaptation because they perfectly portrayed what happened in the books and it feels like the viewers also grew with the characters and they're so endearing tbvh
I personally prefer the series better. You say it doesn't show much emotion and bases more of the comedy side, but I think both are in it and mean a great deal. The comedy can make other characters horrified or sad. And as for the emotional side, I think there is a lot. The evil, the good, the sadness, the shock, deaths, escapes, realisations, accidents, findings, all burst with emotion. It really made me feel for it. The movie wizzed through things I found. It didn't go through things with detail, or emphasize things, like the series did
I actually think the series has far more emotional depth than the movies, it just doesnt sacrifice humor for it. Its more stylized and dry and subtle and pervasive and ultimately darker. Also the video tries to say that the restaraunt scene is unnecessary, but it sets up a lot of things for the VFD introduction that becomes increasingly more vitally important. I'm not sure this guy read the books.
I actually think I like the movie more, which is odd because I'm usually prone to liking more recent things first lol. But ig its hard to compare, because the series sets up more mystery and kind of backstory (especially now that the last season of it's out)
Lily Pad I agree
The show is mutch more creepy and season 2 and 3 are awesome
And sad
Like if you prefer the Netflix series, comment if you like the movie better *i personally prefer the series more
The series is way better
I like the movie better, but that’s just my opinion. I like it’s style more, and because I had read the first few books and seen the movie, the first episodes of the show were kinda boring. I think Carrey’s Count Olaf was more sinister, and I don’t think that the more accurate, the better. I want to see an artist’s interpretation of the books, otherwise I would read the books again. Unfortunately, most artists interpretations suck ( I have zero hope for the Artemis Fowl movie). However Coralline and a few others are some exceptions. I also think Jude Law is a better Lemony Snicket ( though he looks less like the real Lemony,) All the casting for the movie was great actually.
Movie
SERIES!!!!
@@constantheadache2045 rewrite it in college format for a better grade.
nothing will beat the ending of the movie. watching their brilliant house turn into nothing was so heartbreaking and them finally reading the letter their parents had sent but never got back to them brilliant. gutted that they didn’t make sequels
You said yourself. Nothing will beat the ending of the movie.
alex sorry but the serie is much better and like the books
DarkGamerHERO - AK I couldn't more agree with you
DarkGamerHERO - AK I just said that the serie is more authentic
alex the ending of the movie is the ending of the first book...which is just kinda weird.
Also the movie never really cares to go after the mystery of the "eye" which is actually the three letters "VFD". VFD is a huuuge part of the actual plot and so is snicket and his brother that is killed by Olaf. The movie is nice but is missing 90 percent of the story.
They couldn't have made a sequel because they messed up the entire story line, missing the majority of the books and putting some parts in the wrong order.
Also the musical number ISN'T THE END. It's the end of the first season (the first four books). There is a second season and the last one will come out. Also at the end at the second season they also have help..since everyone one is talking about how one of the parents survived.
I used to watch the movie all the time and I loved it but after watching the series, it's like they are making thier own story. It's not a bad movie but they totally ruined the story in comparison to the books.
I feel like people who prefer the show are coming from a place of reading the books and expecting to be satisfied. The movie is a clearly better piece of audiovisual work, is just superior quality wise. While the show is more willing to tell the things that happened in the books, and has more time to it. The movie and the show have different purposes, to please audience and to make a film.
I saw the film for the first time las year and haven't felt the need to watch the series becouse it was never gonna live up to how much I like the movie. But I am going to start listening to the audio books soon and after reading the comment section I think I might want to watch the series afterwards.
From my own experience until now I think you are spot on!
@@femkevanwageningen6068 Yeah, same. I totally agree with this opinion.
i still like the show better. i feel like i could connect with the characters more for some reason. idk:/
Me and you both
We're given more time with them and more reasons to care in the series. The film's time constraints made character development suffer hard.
I agree with him 100% movie was way better.
The show was shallow and childish but was aesthetically pleasing with good music. The tone is better in the movie, darker, better acting, and not cheesy (unlike the show).
Biggest difference imo, is how the show mostly targets kids, while the movie targets young adults. That's mostly why I like the movie better - which I think alings better to the vision of the books.
Agreed 💯
ikr
The netflix show is more like the books. The more eccentric tone helps it in later installments, where it can clash with serious moments (In a good way)
Also it makes it seem like Oplaf is getting more desperate
Coach Moose yes, he really wants the bobualair fortune and to kill biolet
Coach Moose the only thing I don’t like about the Netflix series is that it is less realistic. But yeah
I find the to movie to be better then the show as much as I find the show a bit too silly and the books get much darker later on (book 5 and 6 being the turning points). The show is closer to the story of the books though but the movie tone and character portrayal are better, well at least in my opinion.
Yup...
I'd like a series in the style of the movie. Both leave me slightly unsatisfied. That said, I appreciate both for their respective (exclusive) qualities.
The series was a lot better because it has higher entertainment value, deeper connection with the characters since they have longer screen time, and damn I just want to point out how great Neil is as Count Olaf. He was definitely made for the role.
Thanks. This video just wrecked my evening, my whole life, and my day.
KevClips Gaming just look away
Look away
Look away
Look away
Look away
Preferred the series. Had more of a plot, and rose suspense the whole 3 seasons
Exactly
Right!!
"The *BOODOOLARE* children are similar in both versions"
Gets triggered
Yeah
The way Jim Carrey says "I realize my humble abode isn't as fancy as the BaudeLYAHE mansion" cracks me up all the time XD
I saw this the second he said it lmaooo
@@tenor8068 same
Altough I prefer the series much more, I have to say the overall color pallete and cgi of the 2004 version is suprisingly superior
I wasn't sure if I'd like the show, mostly because I couldn't really imagine NPH as Count Olaf, but in the end, I absolutely loved it. The way they did Snicket's narration was incredible. The random musical numbers, which I thought would be annoying, were actually such a great addition to the show. I got genuinely attached to some of the guardians and losing them was painful (especially Monty). The dry humor and wit, along with the deeper moments of introspection, really follow the tone of the books (I know, some people don't care about that, but I loved that aspect of the books, so having it in the show was such a boon). I also love the fantasy aspect and how beautifully it was filmed. You also see a bit more character development in the children, guardians, and in random side characters (like some of the minions and random VFD members). I know that many of these things are because the show is much longer than the movie, and the show wasn't perfect by any means, but I just liked it better.
Also... unpopular opinion but I don't really like Jim Carrey and didn't like him as Count Olaf. Pls don't hate me.
+Katie McGowan I completely agree with you!!
I didn't like Jim Carrey either
I adore NPH
Neil Patrick harris is just perfect
The child actors in the show make me want to drink a glass of bleach. I think the film child actors are genuinely brilliant.
Auden Chamberlain true
You cant beat Emily Browning
Auden Chamberlain Definitely. Claus always has this confused/frustrated expression, it's really annoying...
Auden Chamberlain Wtf are u talking about the acting on the show from the kids was good
ShadowManV3 Not really... They have the same expressions all the time and they just look bored. The baby is seriously a better actor!
I personally think the television is more faithful and enthralling. This is also coming from a girl who refused to watch it when it came out because of her love for the film.
ChakaWhat z that is my thoughts excatly, i was like naw the tv show wouldn’t be s good but when i watched it i fell in love with it
The author of the books wrote the screenplay for the show.
I know! It's so great.
ChakaWhat I thought the movie was crap when I watched it a few years ago. I didn't see the need to smash 3 books together. I love the TV show though.
Tekno Pathetic not really besides Poe being black and having the owners of the mill being gay
I loved Billy Connolly as Uncle Monty. He brought a Robin Williams’esque warmth to the character.
My own personal thought on the two adaptations aside... a closer adaptation to the source material doesn't automatically constitute a superior product.
Aubree Grossman I agree with you on that. But nostalgia still doesn't automatically make something better. 2 great examples of this are the adaptations of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and The Shining.
Aubree Grossman To an extent I do agree with the long for vs short form aspect, but it's not like that's a hard rule. I actually call back on my example of the Shining as a perfect example, it's also a good example of superior and inferior products since there's a much more noticeable difference in quality between the 2. In case you're unfamiliar, Stephen King hated Kubrick's film so he worked to get a miniseries started. This series followed the book almost to a T and suffered for it greatly. Kubrick understood that when adapting something from a written to a visual medium, things need alteration to fit a visual medium. That being said though, this problem doesn't manifest itself nearly as much in the series of unfortunate events.
Aubree Grossman No problem, the biggest flaw I see in the Netflix unfortunate events is that the pacing sometimes comes to a snail's crawl. Should there be other problems that stem from the aspect of being a super faithful adaptation I'd have to rewatch the series with the intend of finding them.
Dominic Uccelli I agree but when adapting a series of books especially, accuracy to not just the plot elements but the tone and method of storytelling can better accentuate the plot. The movie was nice, but the difference in tone and events would not fit the longform story of the series. The show can't resolve the last episode of the season like the movie did because it's not the conclusion of the story! The most satisfying conclusion has to be at the very end of the tale. The movie and the show are so different in format and their aims, its difficult to compare them and easily pick which was better. According to this channel, the movie was better for those who want to see a movie and aren't as familiar with the events of the books. For fans of the books and those who are watching a television series, the show satisfies more in that area.
In case I wasn't quite clear in my initial post, I'm not calling which is better between the film or the series. Truth be told I'm far from being able to make that decision. My aim was more to address all the comments below that conflate book accuracy with quality. In terms of the movie not fitting the long form story... you're right. But I also don't think that was ever the intention. When I think back on how the events of the film transpired, I'm left thinking that the team wanted that story to be self contained. A deliberate decision was made to bookend the film with the events of Bad Beginning which did a lot to tell a cohesive and self contained story. Add to that the fact that they simply can't go to the events of Miserable Mill from where the film ended and the fact that some form of closure was given when they revisited the remains of the house, along with the film's explanation for the fire, plenty of signs exist suggesting that they wanted to tell just the one story and leave it with a somewhat open end. Secondly, I will concede that a closer adaptation very often leads to a more satisfying product, but that's the optimal word... satisfying. Again, not speaking in specific regards to this series, but satisfying and superior aren't exactly synonyms. When I hear satisfying, I think of the product appealing to nostalgia. Yeah direct translations of the book events are gonna be more satisfying because it's a much more familiar product, it appeals to the sense of nostalgia and familiarity which gets you down deep. As a contrast, alterations may not be as satisfying but are able to provide what can very easily end up as better moments. An example I love is in the later Harry Potter novels/films, more specifically, Phoenix to Hallows. One of the big changes made between the page and the screen was that the main trio were treated more like adults. They were doing thing and having agency more than in the books where we saw a lot more adolescent angst and playing back seat to characters like Dumbledor who were really out there getting things done.
wish the netflix series had the same tone and acting value as the movie did.
It was supposed to be a darker version. But the breaking of the 4th wall and the obvious I'm a terrible villain jokes, or any jokes at all ruin it.
Its supposed to be, this is a terrible story. These people aren't listening to the kids. This is a terrible man. Nobody can see through his acting and disguises. There is no hope for these children.
I feel like I watching Bugs Bunny in man form trying to ruin the children's lives.
And they're just like, THIS IS RIDICULOUS.
And then count olaf agrees with them.
I'm excited for the next season, where there can't be a comparison to the movie, because the movie made specific plot choices so the story would end after 3 books because they were too lazy to make it a harry potter style 7 parts movie, squishing a couple of books in at a time.
i don't know if it's so much as a lazy thing as a not believing in the value into making a sequel.
which is also probably why the shows first season ended with the misirable mill rather then just the first three books. as a statement about the movie.
I don't know if I agree with you about it being a statement about the movie. The movie may have had something to do with it, but more of a making sure people realize they're doing all the books, and not just an elongated version of the movie.
If you compare the books to the show/movie, you get a much different opinion of the show/movie than you do if you compare the sow to the movie.
The movie was as if someone only read the first 3 books and went, this is cool, we could make this a cool movie.
The show was like someone read all the books and then dedicated their entire lives to making it a tvshow, but then had budget issues. the biggest problem with the show is that it is being compared to the movie.
IDK... But the show was much more like the books. Not really believable as an adult but as a child very much so. I remember reading the books and laughing at Olaf rather than being afraid. I mean I was afraid of him at some points but mainly I thought of him as a goofy mean idiot. The books are, in the plot, very dark, but in the voice very light. And that's what the show did. It took a dark plot and played it out in a more light or comedic voice/tone.
I personally hated the movie. Not because of the acting or the mood, that was fantastic! It's just I will never be able to get past the fact that they totally ruined the plot. I am for the show because it stays by the book. In fact, most of the scenes are word for word! If the movie wasn't based off the book and was a stand-alone, than I would like it.
Tallyredhead Same! I was looking for this 💁🏻♀️
Thank you!
Just because it's closer to the book doesn't make it better. The film is a better.
@@ripplegaming7393 Its better for *THEM* because its closer to the book. Is it not obvious?
Same
The movie: These are the orphans.
The Netflix Series: I T S T H E C O U N T I T S T H E C O U NT
I like the show far more... save for the song at the end of the first season, it was better in every aspect. Olaf's Troupe are supposed to have small redeeming qualities save for Esme Squalor, the movie made all of them complete monsters with no humanity, but the TV Show reveals they have minds of their own, have good qualities, and could be redeemed if they stop letting Count Olaf brow beat them (which eventually they each do in the books, unless they die first).
The books need to be factored in, as some decisions and actions are heavily influenced by the books. The reason Count Olaf's disguises work on adults, is because every member of the V.F.D., Olaf included, was trained to have excellent disguise skills, so much so that when the Children end up using the techniques eventually, Olaf, Esme, and other V.F.D. members are just as tricked by them in disguise.
There is a theory that Olaf's appearance and 'Lack of acting skill' are Lemony Snicket's own bias perspective (just as how the Harry Potter Books are seen through Harry's own skewed perceptions, so too are A Series of Unfortunate Events viewed through Snicket's biased views on the narrative... remember, Lemony Snicket exists in the World of his stories, and is allegedly telling the tales from accounts and research he's done)
Earthbound Sauce In my opinion, the show is much closer to the books than the movie
Jerome Davis strongly disagree, as someone who read all 13 of the books i couldnt care less how close the movie was, i think the movie is better in every way, actors, tone, cinematography, music, etc.
Fingers998 The Daily Punctilio, the Volunteers Fighting Disease, and Count Omar would be so happy that you don't care about the true story, enjoy music, and like paying more for less.
The movie has Olaf facing all the tortures he brought upon the children, it downplayed the roles of the Troupe, and despite having a big movie budget, it wasted most of the money on just two actors: Jim Carrey and Meryl Streep... and skimped on story. Also, since both use Catherine O'Hara in different roles, your statement becomes weakened, since the movie underused everyone except Carrey.
Fingers998 My sister watched both the series and the movie, and thought that the series was better, and she had never read the books, but my friend, also never reading the books thought the movie was better. I'm just saying we can all have opinions, and that's ok. Just don't go against others saying that they were wrong.
Jerome Davis your comment was a blessing amongst everything :) thanks
Think you missed the point of the series, pal. It's satire. Big mistake not to consider the source material. The Netflix adaptation is way more faithful to the original tone that made the series unique in the first place.
How in any way is the Netflix adaptation satire? It's an adaptation of the series, it's not fucking satire lmao
J M No, the books were satire, and while Netflix took that fact in stride the movie was much less self aware.
@@JM-tx6xc it's satire disguised as a children's adventure book with the absurdist subgenre, a subgenre that can be found under tragicomedy, comedy, and tragedy. Before you laugh at others' comments and say "it's not fucking satire lmao" as if they are stupid, please make sure you are correct first. Thank you.
@@thebinlgbtisbabadook7832 Right, of course the series is mocking books who constantly make light of how grim and depressing they are but while being a form of satire, they also told a rich and compelling story. A story that wasn't very well executed in the series. I understand the source material, I just may have misspoken or not interpreted well.
@@JM-tx6xc It's okay, most of the time it's hard to have a decent conversation in the UA-cam comments because of its limitations. We can't explain as much as we want to, and always ended up either misunderstanding others or being minsundertood by others.
The Netflix show is extremely Close to the Book!!!!! There's a reason why the kids were in the Restaurant. They do the exact same thing in the Book!!! It's An amAzing adaptation
Yeh
Leo Valladares well it makes sense because I heard that the author of the books lemony sniket pen name made the script
Not really, sure some details are there but think of of the stuff that is missing, Mr. Poe Taking them to their new guardians, The stuff that happens that Aunt Josephine is afraid of when the house falls, Klaus going to the optometrists again, and other details, like how Klaus is way shorter than Violet....
Some things that work in one medium don't work as well in another. Just because something follows the source material beat for beat, doesn't by default make it a good adaptation.
daniel ap It does here. The show has done a better job at capturing the essence of the books and source material in a whole.
The film made a lot of assumptions and was made while the books where still being published, while the Netflix series has the whole series and the author to work with. And the funny thing about the books is that the transition from page to screen actually works really well.
I actually feel the slower pacing for the series was almost perfect as it introduced so many details and plots, esp about the volunteers and the past. It made me want to rewatch episodes to catch details leading to the ending. I think the only time I skipped scenes were during vile villagers and Mr poe's obnoxious ness
"The series failed to give emotional depth." Did you really watched it? In the movie Olaf's henchmen were portrayed as just a bunch of blind dumb sheep. In the series we get to learn that they can actually think for themselves but failed to see that they deserve better than him, and we felt sorry for them, even understand them. All characters are multi-dimensional in the series, but one-dimensional in the movie.
Olaf in the movie is portrayed as a flat general common average villain, just all out plain bad guy born evil. In the series, if you are a good film critic, you will notice how neil p harris was able to manifest pain behind Olaf's eyes, hinting you that everything he is doing is because he has been hurt by the people closest to him in the past, even before you knew his backstory. He is a human. He is relatable. And because he is relatable, he affects your emotion.
If you are the kind of film critic that not only looks at the cinematography and the whatever but ALSO looks at a film as a whole, you will see how deep the tv series is and how layered it is compare to the film.
I like both versions but you seemed biased.
I do respect your opinion as this is YOUR review, but please next time review wisely and professionally, review without biased. I only looked biased in this comment because I want to point out the negative things about the movie that you didn't point out, and the good things about the series that you didn't point out.
Bear in mind this was only released when series 1 was out. As I recall the henchmen were still pretty basic characters with no thoughts for themselves.
@@lukebeforeyougame145 Bear in mind that even in S1 the Henchperson With No Indeterminate Gender was already giving bits of epiphany speeches (that Olaf usually interrupts so we don't get to focus on them). The Women With White Faces also ask questions compare to the women in the movie whenever Olaf's plan is, you know, not so thought through.
@Kenneth Sigua who? NitPix? Nah I think his head just needs a little shaking and rattling from his fellow film critics to pour out all the biases from his ears haha 😂 he got good movie reviews sometimes.
I think hes talking about mr poe
And S2/S3 are out and
*spoiler warning* the henchmen leave count olaf when he wants them to throw sunny of mount frott
And fernald (hookie) reunites with his sister fiona in sonething grotto
Their not simple minded blank slaves DUDE
(To the maker of the review cuz I forgot the channles name)
You have to look at it Logistically too. The show had three season to display emotional depth but the film only had about 1hr20mins. He can only compare what is the same between the shows which is the first 6 episodes and I feel the film did better. However, overall the series was better, when you take into account of everything.
Made me cry because sunny went full on cgi baby mode at random parts of the Netflix series.
CGI/dummy Sunny in the series is for comedic effect (playing poker, sanding a rock etc), whereas in the film its just glaringly obvious for no real reason.
I have watched both the whole Netflix series and movie. In the movie KLAUS DOESNT WEAR GLASSES!! I like the Netflix series *way more*
So which of the characters are black in the original???
The reason you are saying this is because you watched all 13 episodes of the series. When he made this, there were only four, therefore you could not get used to the way they played it out. Also, if you do consider the source material then the movie seems more tragic. When you watch the TV show, remember there are musical numbers. When you hear music, you want to keep listening. Therefore, you would watch the show over and over and become more fond of it. Then you would make up some excuse to say that the TV series is better. As I said at the beginning, there are now 13 40 minutes episodes to watch. So you watch some episodes, some other episodes would seem like you have not watched them for a while. And when it feels like you have not watched it for a while you will watch it again. Then you would hear more musical numbers and as I said before become more fond of the series. And you don’t have to wear glasses to be intelligent.
@@monicastanden1216 well we have opinions? I watched the movie and just recently watch the Netflix series once and i loved the Netflix adaptation the most.
Because it is longer. If you watched the movie over and over you would probably prefer it more.
Plutosus Wait, wasn't Klaus wearing glasses sort of important for the whole optometrist thing?
One of the big themes in the books from my understanding is that Lemony Snicket doesn't want you to view/read the story, as it is too tragic and unfortunate. The long dragged out scenes from the TV show don't only foreshadow future events, but they are also accurate to the books. They drag out the story to make it require more patience, like a test of willpower for the viewer.
Also, Patrick Warburton's Lemony Snicket is the best portrayal I could possibly imagine. I cannot think of a singular actor that could fit the character better.
Love the film. It’s beautiful. Wish they had continued. Thankfully we got the Netflix series. Love that too.
Imagine that the movie became a show
Same writers, sets, actors and director but with 40 minute episodes
Bruhhskie Idk That would've been awesome.
Bruhhskie Idk Ikr. when you watch it, you just can't help but rant about the narration and olaf and poe and acting
Those would be some expensive 40 minute episodes at this point. :_D One can dream, though.
po tato the narration was great, Olaf was great, and Poe was exactly true to the books. Not sure what you're talking about. The show's just better.
Juatin Bonds Games you are right. now that I've watched more episodes, I think they've got the details right. the only thing I really miss is Jude Law being Lemony Snicket. i loved his voice narration. But hey, we've all got different preferences. heh
woah anyone notice how in the movie the judge is the same lady that plays the eye doctor in the show
reby sully
woah, you're right. I never noticed.
reby sully I know isn't that so cool
lmfao thats cool right
I prefer the film. I wish it had been longer, allowing moments/characters to breathe and sequels would have been nice.
IKR ? They should had made the movie in to seasons , everything in the movie was so much better
It was made for theatrical release, not for a streaming service. Which is why everyone here is tilted towards the series.
@@psychoftz174 that's why... they made a... series...?
@@mothercoconuts4109 As explained in the video and in various comments, the series take the story in a much different tone. If they had made a series to continue what the film had built, and to get the fans back, they would have made it in the same tone, probably even darker, and certainly not in such a different approach.
The series doesn't answer or completes the movie, but works independently.
@@Raphael-2 I'm not talking about the tone, neither were they. I was saying that if you wanted the movie to be in separate sections that's why they made it a series?
The movie is just a lot of things jammed together the series has more characters and get to explain them more
I watched the series and the movie and I like how the series makes the scenes longer bc when I watched the movie I was like it over already over and the most annoying thing for me was was Klaus did not were glasses so in my opinions like the series more
I haven’t seen the movie, but I definitely enjoyed the series. I never really found the pacing to be a problem, as I really liked just being in the unique atmosphere of all the locations they go to. I also don’t really think the show was all that comical. Maybe it wasn’t as serious as the movie, but there were definitely some gut-wrenching moments in there.
Something that not too many people understood is that when the aunt Josephine's house was falling down in the movie, a door knob actually exploded, just like aunt's fear
I think we caught onto how her biggest fears are ultimately the reason the house collapses in the first place. Even with the refrigerator almost smushing them.
Literally everyone understood that
All of her fears about the house came true in the movie
@@kim-hendrikmerk4163 One of the Baudelaire kids were actually reciting some of the stuff Josephine said, it shows they're aware of Josephine's fears have all come true.
A Series of Unfortunate Events was the first book series I ever read. So growing up with the Jim Carrey movie I loved it, but was disappointed with how much story was actually missing, I told my aunt once when I was a child "I want to see more in a movie or a tv show or something" which brings us to the Netflix series. When I found out that it was going to be a thing, I was so excited to see what they would do. And in my opinion I absolutely love it. I love the books, I love the movie and I love the TV series. It's really hard to compare them because of how different they all are, but I love them for the individual works of art that they are. Thank you Lemony Snicket (DH) for this amazing series. I'm almost 22 and I started reading these books when I was about 8, I have even got "The world is quiet Here" and the VFD on my left ankle.
I love the series but the movie is a masterpiece. It’s literally perfect. If anything I just wish they finished the whole series with that cast and crew
Kelfie b That would’ve been awesome!
Kelfie b hell yes that would have been phenomenal.. then no one would complain
I wish they would have made a series of 3 movies.
they tried but the child actors were busy (especially emily browning) and by the time they freed up they had aged too much to continue playing those roles. the show did a better job casting them anyways tho
They couldn’t have! Klaus didn’t have glasses in the movie! A huge plot point of the 4th book is his glasses keep keep getting broken
DID NOT REALIZE MERYL WAS AUNT JOSEPHINE TILL NOW OMG KID ME WAS BLIND
Probably blinded by a door handle shard.
Sameee😂😂😂
100th like lol
Has anyone seen Into the Woods, Meryl Streep killed the Mother Gothel role. Although I cried.
@@Mintea326 Yes! She was amazing! And the same Costume Designer worked on both Films!
Have you READ the BOOKS? The SHOW IS ALMOST WORD FOR WORD! CAKE SNIFFER!
0:27
So what? The film feels more like the books, and is much sadder.
@@andrerose3896 More like 0:27 -- 0:36, unless that's what you meant lol
@@Bro-cx2jc yeah
@@BoraCM I disagree, I thought the movie took its source material way too seriously, while the series managed to strike the perfect balance between ridiculousness and actual mystery and suspense, just like the books.
Plus half the episodes were written by the actual author of the books himself sooooooo
As someone who loved the books growing up, the Netflix series may be closer to the books and a stronger adaption overall, but I personally prefer the movie, perhaps for nostalgic reasons. I loved the cast and loved Jim Carrey’s Count Olaf so much that as a young girl, I found him equally hilarious and scary, and I suppose it was hard to top that for me.
I do like Patrick Warburton’s narrating though. He just has a fun tone haha.
I prefer the TV show. Nice review!
I agree
the book is actually following the story in the Netflix series
If the Netflix series had the acting of the movie, then it would be perfect !!!!
Lewis Allen the acting of the children was supposed to feel wooden and cartoony
Yes, the acting in the tv series is supposed to be very wooden and exaggerated at the same time, but honestly the fact that it was on purpose doesn't make it better. It still makes it all feel very fake and surreal, and hard to get into for a lot of fans, myself included.
The more realistic acting in the movie appeals to me more, as a longtime fan of the books, and I'd really been hoping the tv show would take those elements from the movie. But alas, they obviously didn't.
Also musical numbers... Just why? No musical numbers in the books... Just saying.
Couldn't agree more!
BawlinColin The children are supposed to be wooden but it's pretty clear that they're inexperienced actors.
I like the series better. I read that the author wrote a script for the film but the studio didn't use it. Netflix welcomed the author's participation in the creation of the series. According to friends that read the book this shows. The main difference is tone and pacing. The humor of the series makes for a more enjoyable experience. While trying to squeeze 3 books into 1hour and 48 minutes runtime is ridiculous. It made for a very confusing mess of a film. The ending of the movie felt like things were going to get better . While the series stuck to the narrative that this is doomed to end badly. Patrick Burton's take on deadpan narrator Lemony Snicket is great listen to. With his mini essay on the English language to entertaining.
The movie was not a "confusing mess of a film". As a film it made 100% sense. Patrick Burton - I dunno he sucks.
you can't go around and say people suck, I honestly agree, the show was a bit better in the way they twisted the plot, but on the other hand the film had a much better way on handling tone and the actions of a certain character.
to be honest my only faviroute thing about the movie is Stephano, he's funny but he can easily change into a threat in a instant
Not only did they not use the script, but they fired Daniel Handler. Which was unfortunate, seeing as HE'S the writer of the books they were trying to adapt..
from where does that info comes from?@@sarahdm5336
When I was about 5 or 6 my grandmother told me if I rode my bike too fast a piece of metal would fly off and hit me in the eye. Being so young I actually believed that garbage.
So if you were wondering, yes, there really are people like Aunt Josephine.
The Netflix version feels more true to the theme, emphasizing the absurdist elements of the story for comedic and story-telling effect. I think the story is far too convoluted and campy to work well as a serious film (as the film tried more so to do), but works excellent as a slightly dark absurdist comedy.
The only thing I really miss from the film is the 'Drive Away' piece by Thomas Newman during the credits... was such a good piece, wish it'd somehow made it into the Netflix version in some capacity, heh.
Totally. I didn't even want to watch the movie as a kid, because it was just so depressing. Without the cartoon-ish feeling and the over-the-top comedy, you're just watching some guy tell you that bad things are going to happen, and then they do.
I haven't read the books in a while, but I recall the tone being rather depressing throughout. Yes there was an absurdist overtone throughout to help lighten the mood, but the story is overall rather dark. It's literally called a series of unfortunate events. And in that regard, the film is more faithful.
In the movie, Klaus and Violet legit look like siblings. Amazing casting for all characters tbh. If the movie was a show instead, it would've been gold. Every book was so rushed into 1 movie. The show was so childish and cartoony, even though it was supposed to be bleak? Doesn't make sense
Felicia
Yea, in the show, the kids took their parents' death pretty well lol
I feel like it gave the dark show some comedic relief.
Firstname Lastname there is no comedic relief. the whole show is a comedy. there is no drama at all
Felicia looking alike but terrible acting.
Elijah Medley it's not comedic relief, just comedy
The movie was something I related to as a child. About the cruelty of the world. I went through some things. I got what Klaus said about home being where your parents are actually doing their job. It's not home if that's not happening. Something about the movie is more true. It's more real.
I grew up with the same thoughts.
I still call the movie my favourite.
My suggestion: watch the movie and then watch the second and third season it worked for me and just made me happy overall
Many hugs to you, Ava Lee. I know the feeling.
I feel like that whole rule about which you watch first really applies here, for most of us. I also get the impression that younger teens like the series while older audiences (be they adults now or younger when they watched it) prefer the movies.
One thing I will say is that I loved both Count Olafs (although I do have a favorite), and even the Lemony Snickets nearly tie for me.
i grew up with the books and the show is so much better than the movie. the show does great justice to the books and many of the negatives for the show you said are parts of the books. i guess growing up and reading the books over and over makes me love the show way more. the movie just frustrates me
I agree. This book was the first time I have ever truly enjoyed reading, the Movie moved way too fast leaving less time for character development. It was frustrating and not satisfying. I haven't finished the series, but so far I love how they take their time with each character. The series also has it's share of deep sad moments, but I also love it's "cartoon-y" feel.
I did did grow up with the books but I liked the movie I didn't mind much of the differences because the performances were pretty good and I love the narrator he sounded like how my teacher would read the books to us. Putting a tad bit more inference on clues and meanings. Honestly I haven't seen the show but how he explained I can see why people enjoy it but I like the movie better because it gets to the point and the points are hit not half bad. I only had one gripe with the movie tho it was the ending alittle bit. It went by alittle fast but IG it did the ending alittle justice. But in summary I read the books ,enjoyed the movie (despite a few flaws) but haven't seen the show but again I can see why people enjoy the show based on this videos analysis of both of em.
Also another thing I liked about the movie was the characters being brought to life pretty well like really well.
my wife was obsessed with the books as a kid. so when i raised questions about things like "why is mr poe a complete idiot?" or " whats with all the stopping and explanations with snicket?"...... well she bought the complete set of unfortunate events, and i get it. appreciate the show much much better.
the whole review here seems one sided honestly
But we can all agree, the books are better.
Indeed Sir. Hamilton, indeed
Alexander Hamilton Ya broke ur wife’s heart
Dafuq is a book?
@@itssheep685 whoa whoa whoa hold up! What is a book?
Brian Belcher oh- I am very embarrassed. I didn’t notice you were being sarcastic...
In the tv show Monty actually does meet Olaf, in season 2 that just came out they show years back when all of the relatives knew each other and they all knew count Olaf then.
They weren't talking about the show. They were saying that he doesn't know him in the movie. And they mentioned it because it makes the movie seem a bit more realistic. In the show, Monty doesn't realize it's Olaf until a bit later, but he should've immediately realized it.
I feel like this video would be generally very different now that the 3rd season is out. Olaf's character development personally blew my mind, the whole storyline got so much more interesting...
I feel like the style shouldve been like a mix between the movie and TV show. Very dark and sad, but still light hearted and surreal. I always got that impression from the books.
Weebo Sneeebo but those two things are such a contradiction
novablue201 ! Very similar to the books. Contradicting tone.
novablue201 ! And? A good writer can handle contradicting tones, especially if they're switching between them skillfully
The newer episodes are all very funny, but goes very deep too. I actually cried when Olivia dies in episode 8 season 2 because the TV series made you love her so much, and then SNAP. She's gone.
As a fan of the books, they're both very good. However, the film's problems wouldn't be apparent until future films were starting to roll out. In their haste to adapt three novelettes into one film, they dropped a lot of plot points that are seemingly insignificant, that become very important later on. They would have to go back and drastically change the later installments to get it to work. Not to say it couldn't be done and be done well, but it certainly would have been a lot more work to get it right.
The television series took its time, but that's because the books took their time. They're far more faithful adaptation to the books. And by going slow, they're not going to run into the same issues that movies would have. They are able to put these small things in there that would become important later on.
I wish they had created sequels to the film 😔 I waited my entire childhood for the next one. I liked the darker tone and the actors being more serious. I was excited for the series but I fell off it after the second season