• RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 days ago

    The Hobbit

    From the shitty shoehorned romance to wholesale elimination of plot points in the original story. Yeah, there was definitely some drama in the whole production of the film, but nonetheless it was crap.

  • shalafi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days ago

    Can I flip the script? Black Hawk Down was the most faithful adaptation of a book I’ve ever seen. As to the book, the author wanted to tell the story of the Battle of Mogadishu, faithfully. He had unprecedented, at the time, access to Defense Department files, interviewed everyone involved, strived for perfect accuracy.

    When those guys are on that street corner, that’s what happened.

    • SSTF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      This is going to sound super nitpicky but even the first time I saw it, the modern body, ahistorical Aimpoints seen throughout the entire movie bothered me. It’s only because they are so unavoidably prominent and because the rest of the movie’s props are so well done that they stick out.

        • SSTF@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 days ago

          The red dots used on almost all of the Delta Force guns.

          That style of red dot didn’t exist until a few years later. At the time it should have been the equally distinct looking “long tube” Aimpoints.

          Again, I know it is super nitpicky, but they are so prominent and visible especially with those red lenses throughout the movie. They are only a few years wrong, but it’s like if a WW1 movie was full of Thompson submachineguns.

          The BDH movie otherwise does a lot of great prop and costume details. Not flawless, but the other inaccuracies are much less noticeable.

    • YappyMonotheist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      I’d say Denis’ is waaaaaaay worse, they ruined Chani and added some nonsense subplot in part two as well… it’s just prettier. 😤

      I loved Arrival though, and I do feel like most disruptive changes in his Dunes were studio notes because it would be more relatable to “modern audiences”.

        • YappyMonotheist@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          9 days ago

          Zendaya just plays an immature, “rebel without a cause” New Yorker instead of Chani, a strong and intelligent Fremen young lady who falls in love with and follows her Muad’dib, not just because of his prophetic abilities but also/mostly because of his character. But, in the current Western cultural understanding, that just wouldn’t fly as strong means selfish and reactive and intelligent means rebellious and lippy. She’s awed by Paul, as would be anyone surrounding him (to Paul’s chagrin when it changes those around him to more “robotic” beings as it does with Stilgar), but also understands him deeply and is his emotional pillar, while Paul’s the pillar to his entire community. They just wanted a “girl boss” and that’s what we had in Denis’ Dunes. 😔

            • YappyMonotheist@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              9 days ago

              I don’t understand what “woman hating subtext” you read from my comment but, if you read the books, it will just seem appropriate.

                • YappyMonotheist@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  9 days ago

                  You’re feigning ignorance then if you actually recall the books. Zendaya’s/Denis’ Chani and Herbert’s Chani are like night and day. And, again, what exactly was ‘misogynistic’ about my comment? And do I have to start copypasting passages of Dune and Messiah and make a comparative analysis with Denis’ Dune? It’s past midnight over here, my guy.

  • floo@retrolemmy.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days ago

    Jurassic Park. The original was a horror/thriller that would have had to be unrated if they made it literally from the book. Instead, we got a PG-13 family film that really did not live up to the book.

    In fact, it’s the first time that I read the book before seeing the movie, and I learned to never ever do that again.

    • DominusOfMegadeus@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      The worst part of all these stupid spin off movies (besides how atrocious I’m assuming they are) is that they significantly reduce the likelihood we will ever get a movie that is faithful to the book.

      • bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

        I think since the Jurassic World series started, all of the reboots have mostly been “remember this” from the first movie, and none could really be anything more than that. Every one has to include a scene that’s a homage to the original. Honestly feels like the franchise needs to have a genre switch up to force it to be something original.

        • SSTF@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 days ago

          I mildly enjoyed that the message of Jurassic World was “This park (movie) is a soulless project that shouldn’t exist and only props itself up on increasingly mindless spectacle.”