I really like the way you put to words how the live action Disney movies feel off to me. It’s essentially the same movie but with different voices and one or two new things that don’t add or subtract much from the plot, because it’s all being done completely ‘in house’ as it were, so nothing can be done that makes it any better or sometimes even more distinct than the animated version.
it's kinda weird to hear a video essay that doesn't sound super pretentious. where's the unnecessarily long pauses between sentences? the pompous cadences? the final line that's supposed to sound super profound but actually doesn't if you think about it for more than 2 seconds? loved it ❤
@@Kiss_My_Aspergers no, i've watched their videos. i don't think of them as video essays, altho ig they are by definition. i meant video essays about movies, like Pop Culture Detective, Nerdwriter, Brown Table, etc.
@@YellowpowR (Video essay cap on) Well, as we can ascertain, the appropriate video length for any video is entirely dependent on the amount of content that the video is attempting to offer, and the necessary space that content requires to properly carry itself to the audience. If the delivery of a message is too short, we call it underbaked. If a message only requires 5 minutes to get itself across and the video only has that message, the video should be 5 minutes. Same principle if its 2 minutes or 30. The conventions of video essays do not matter if the core purpose of the video essay is not being fulfilled. This comment was half serious and half joking because I wanted to explain video essays in a dumb video essay style.
I'm in two minds about adaptations. I think as long as the film is good, I'm fine with things being changed and I expect it, especially with books and comics because there's just soooo much information that needs to be crammed into a couple of hours. It sucks when certain things you love from a story get adapted and some don't but they can't fit everything. But I would also go crazy over a shot for shot adaptation of some things that I really love, so I dunno, it depends I guess! I don't think it's possible for me to have a blanket rule on it. What bothers me the most though is when they make character changes, like how Hermione got Ron's lines and he was basically comic relief. That stuff bothers me so much. If they're weakening one character to strengthen another then it just feels wrong.
That is kinda true, but there’s no reason to change the source material, then it shouldn’t really be considered an adaptation. I mean the one clear example that proves your point is the Shinning, but for example Hunter X Hunter is a great adaptation, which doesn’t really change the events of the story, and the major flaw it did have, was because it didn’t follow the source material completely.
Another great example is Into the Spiderverse. It deviates from the source material but captured the spirit of the comics better than anything we’ve gotten.
Well done, friend.. This was a very entertaining and well crafted video essay. I know how much time goes into making these and I appreciate the work you have done. Keep it up.
Percy Jackson is a good example of this. The issue was purely that it changed, I was that the core aesthetic of Ancient Greek stuff but fully modern was dropped, and instead the movie had Ancient Greek stuff, still shown as ancient and different just in the modern day
A perfect adaptation is a useless adaptation . If you make a movie as close to the source material as possible , then why should I bother watch your movie and not pick the source material? I would get the true deal , not a copy carbon . A good/useful adaptation is the one that understand the medium , isn't afraid to change things in order to fit the vision of the person who directed it , using the source material as inspiration rather than as the scenario . That's exactly what Disney's renaissance movies did and they became more popular than their source materials.
I've made some shot-for-shot recreations and people always post that they want "a whole movie this way" and "why doesn't Disney do this?" and I always think that no you really wouldn't want a whole movie this way. It's fun in a short video but it'd get old quick as a full movie.
I'm excited to see Taikas version because I'm a fan of his and a fan of Akira. Having seen the film a few times I still feel like it's about light and colors more than plot and I have no clue what he would do with it.
Actually, he sadly stepped downed and Akira (live action) was canceled. Too much delays got in the way. But if I'm being honest, Akira really shouldn't be touch. Animated films like this one are just to good to be passed up. Though, if Akira was to be adapted, I would make it a TV series, not a film.
I agreed with everything you said up until the last sentence. And it might just be my irrational disinterest in everyone supposedly being adapted into a miniseries now. But I agreed in that certain works simply need not be touched.
I'm more optimistic now than I was before. There's no point in getting the same people to tell the same story twice. And the Avatar guys don't have a lot of expience in live-action filmmaking anyway. It could still suck, but at least it's more likely to have its own identity now.
The thing with Akira is that the original movie itself is a pretty poor adapation of a a decently long manga. It stands out on its own merits because of how its made but does a poor job when it comes to getting its story across. Taika's should focus on adapting the manga, not remaking the movie, if anyone wants it to be remotely good.
The film and screenplay were both helmed by the manga author himself, so I don't agree with your suggestion that it's a flawed adaptation. It doesn't cover the full narrative of course but it includes everything relevant given its runtime.
I agree. It did change some themes but to ones I actually prefer over the original. Also, I just really enjoy seeing new actors take on old roles, so I'm always a big fan of disney's live action adaptations for that reason. It's the same reason I love watching several iterations of broadway shows as well.
I totally disagree with the portion about Watchmen, nothing about the movie felt like it was a bad idea, Zack Snyder understood the material and knew that a perfect adaptation would be the only way to tell its story properly, and his style of directing live-action comic book epics fit the movie perfectly
A character's physical appearance has no significance to me so long as the actor is good and the writing is faithful to that character's personality and intended role in the story
Scariest adaptation for me coming up.is Dune. The books carry so much nuance and semi-side story. The 1st movie lost all the demi-magic/science, political drama, charecter development, internalized conflict, and forshadowing; and reduced it to a simple mech war where the good guy wins... hated it. The sci-fi mini series was great (minus the terrible graphics, but least of my concerns). It mirrored the intensity of all the things that made the books great. And while not true to the book, mainly in that Paul was portayed as a brat, rather than the Mentat from the book. This upcomming film has me a bit excited. Timothée Chalamet has the mature intensity to keep true to the book, yet looks very young to give the feel of a boy which Paul is. But still very nervous, pleople dont get that dune is not a heroic victory story, its a forshadowing doom messiah story.
Having change is definitely necessary in adaptation but it’s about knowing what and what not to alter. I can understand being interested in Waititi’s Akita but when looking at films like Thor: Ragnarok, it’s understandable to be apprehensive when the source material and director seem so oddly matched. It could work, but it makes sense to be sceptical. Films like The Lord of the Rings and Spider-Man have shown the effective use of directors from unexpected backgrounds, but when something is beloved, it was logical to be nervous back in the 00’s and it’s logical to be nervous now.
Well the original source material for Akira is a serialized story, while the movie is 2 hours. Which is entirely different than an television adaptation
I totally disagree with you here adaptations can be done well it doesn't have to be beat for beat however it should have strong faithfulness to the source by virtue changing mediums by default will prevent it from being beat for beat, i guess overall I have to say this video is cap.
A perfect adaptation of the lord of the rings would be way worse than the Peter Jackson films, in my opinion. Same with Harry Potter, both are long and slow (although hp is far more readable) and those are never good attributes for movies, even though both the books and movies are great. Many people would love a theoretical 12 hour movie that's an exact representation of the books, but they'd be incredibly dull and boring. If you have 12 hours to spare for a book-faithful experience, just read the book
I really like the way you put to words how the live action Disney movies feel off to me. It’s essentially the same movie but with different voices and one or two new things that don’t add or subtract much from the plot, because it’s all being done completely ‘in house’ as it were, so nothing can be done that makes it any better or sometimes even more distinct than the animated version.
This is so cool, I came from your tiktok, and this is exactly what we wanted for the podcast. Please continue!
it's kinda weird to hear a video essay that doesn't sound super pretentious. where's the unnecessarily long pauses between sentences? the pompous cadences? the final line that's supposed to sound super profound but actually doesn't if you think about it for more than 2 seconds?
loved it ❤
You have clearly never watched ContraPoints, PhilosophyTube, or even Hbomberguy. You should. I think you'll appreciate them. 💜
@@Kiss_My_Aspergers
no, i've watched their videos. i don't think of them as video essays, altho ig they are by definition. i meant video essays about movies, like Pop Culture Detective, Nerdwriter, Brown Table, etc.
The video is 10 minutes long, this guy is milking it. Sure it doesn't sound pretentious, but its milked
What do you believe would be a proper length?
@@YellowpowR
(Video essay cap on)
Well, as we can ascertain, the appropriate video length for any video is entirely dependent on the amount of content that the video is attempting to offer, and the necessary space that content requires to properly carry itself to the audience.
If the delivery of a message is too short, we call it underbaked.
If a message only requires 5 minutes to get itself across and the video only has that message, the video should be 5 minutes. Same principle if its 2 minutes or 30.
The conventions of video essays do not matter if the core purpose of the video essay is not being fulfilled.
This comment was half serious and half joking because I wanted to explain video essays in a dumb video essay style.
I'm in two minds about adaptations.
I think as long as the film is good, I'm fine with things being changed and I expect it, especially with books and comics because there's just soooo much information that needs to be crammed into a couple of hours. It sucks when certain things you love from a story get adapted and some don't but they can't fit everything.
But I would also go crazy over a shot for shot adaptation of some things that I really love, so I dunno, it depends I guess! I don't think it's possible for me to have a blanket rule on it.
What bothers me the most though is when they make character changes, like how Hermione got Ron's lines and he was basically comic relief. That stuff bothers me so much. If they're weakening one character to strengthen another then it just feels wrong.
That is kinda true, but there’s no reason to change the source material, then it shouldn’t really be considered an adaptation. I mean the one clear example that proves your point is the Shinning, but for example Hunter X Hunter is a great adaptation, which doesn’t really change the events of the story, and the major flaw it did have, was because it didn’t follow the source material completely.
Your Pacing and Tone are so we'll crafted I'm in awe.
if someone randomly asked me what Akira was about, my answer would just be "nightmares" followed by a thousand yard stare.
Another great example is Into the Spiderverse. It deviates from the source material but captured the spirit of the comics better than anything we’ve gotten.
Well done, friend.. This was a very entertaining and well crafted video essay. I know how much time goes into making these and I appreciate the work you have done. Keep it up.
One thing I love about Watchmen (Graphic Novels) is the physical layout of the panels by giving each page it's own position on a clock face
This is great - really love all the examples you use (surprisingly not enough essays use clear examples!!!)
Percy Jackson is a good example of this. The issue was purely that it changed, I was that the core aesthetic of Ancient Greek stuff but fully modern was dropped, and instead the movie had Ancient Greek stuff, still shown as ancient and different just in the modern day
A perfect adaptation is a useless adaptation .
If you make a movie as close to the source material as possible , then why should I bother watch your movie and not pick the source material?
I would get the true deal , not a copy carbon .
A good/useful adaptation is the one that understand the medium , isn't afraid to change things in order to fit the vision of the person who directed it , using the source material as inspiration rather than as the scenario .
That's exactly what Disney's renaissance movies did and they became more popular than their source materials.
I've made some shot-for-shot recreations and people always post that they want "a whole movie this way" and "why doesn't Disney do this?" and I always think that no you really wouldn't want a whole movie this way. It's fun in a short video but it'd get old quick as a full movie.
*I HAVE FINALLY FOUND A FUCKING TH-cam ESSAY CHANNEL THAT DOESN'T USE NERDWRITER'S NARRATION CADENCE. HUZZAH!*
Ah I'm not the only one annoyed by that.
Nice video! I really saw "Prince Ali" playing over your example of "Moulin Rouge". What a great idea that would have been!
Eragon was another movie that deviated from the source material and fans hated the movie about.
Someone send this to the Netflix avatar writers. I want it to be good so bad 😩
I'm excited to see Taikas version because I'm a fan of his and a fan of Akira. Having seen the film a few times I still feel like it's about light and colors more than plot and I have no clue what he would do with it.
Actually, he sadly stepped downed and Akira (live action) was canceled. Too much delays got in the way.
But if I'm being honest, Akira really shouldn't be touch. Animated films like this one are just to good to be passed up. Though, if Akira was to be adapted, I would make it a TV series, not a film.
@@osmanyousif7849 that could be interesting as it’s based on a serialized manga.
Akira the film is an adaption itself. Read the manga.
I agreed with everything you said up until the last sentence. And it might just be my irrational disinterest in everyone supposedly being adapted into a miniseries now. But I agreed in that certain works simply need not be touched.
I feel like most people don’t realise that if you want to see a comic book accurate movie you should just read the comic.
now i want a version of prince ali in the style of greatest showman.
With this in mind how do you think the ATLA netflix remake will do now that the original creators left
Riverdale it
I'm more optimistic now than I was before. There's no point in getting the same people to tell the same story twice. And the Avatar guys don't have a lot of expience in live-action filmmaking anyway.
It could still suck, but at least it's more likely to have its own identity now.
The thing with Akira is that the original movie itself is a pretty poor adapation of a a decently long manga. It stands out on its own merits because of how its made but does a poor job when it comes to getting its story across. Taika's should focus on adapting the manga, not remaking the movie, if anyone wants it to be remotely good.
The film and screenplay were both helmed by the manga author himself, so I don't agree with your suggestion that it's a flawed adaptation. It doesn't cover the full narrative of course but it includes everything relevant given its runtime.
Maybe they should NOT make a live adaptation of Akita and instead come up with something original for once.
I...can't dispute Keane's logic. I have to agree with him on all accounts.
I actually thought the Aladdin adaptation was good, maybe not incredible but a pretty good adaptation
I agree. It did change some themes but to ones I actually prefer over the original. Also, I just really enjoy seeing new actors take on old roles, so I'm always a big fan of disney's live action adaptations for that reason. It's the same reason I love watching several iterations of broadway shows as well.
Will Smith saved it.
You are one of the most underrated channels in this channel. Thank you for your hard work.
Keep working hard, mate.
I totally disagree with the portion about Watchmen, nothing about the movie felt like it was a bad idea, Zack Snyder understood the material and knew that a perfect adaptation would be the only way to tell its story properly, and his style of directing live-action comic book epics fit the movie perfectly
Snyder basically mirrored the intention of the original. Everything is inverted. He definitely did not understand it
my number 1 rule: don't change character portrayals via casting
A character's physical appearance has no significance to me so long as the actor is good and the writing is faithful to that character's personality and intended role in the story
Well said!
Scariest adaptation for me coming up.is Dune. The books carry so much nuance and semi-side story. The 1st movie lost all the demi-magic/science, political drama, charecter development, internalized conflict, and forshadowing; and reduced it to a simple mech war where the good guy wins... hated it. The sci-fi mini series was great (minus the terrible graphics, but least of my concerns). It mirrored the intensity of all the things that made the books great. And while not true to the book, mainly in that Paul was portayed as a brat, rather than the Mentat from the book. This upcomming film has me a bit excited. Timothée Chalamet has the mature intensity to keep true to the book, yet looks very young to give the feel of a boy which Paul is. But still very nervous, pleople dont get that dune is not a heroic victory story, its a forshadowing doom messiah story.
What do you think about it now?
You lost me at "Watchmen bad" I dissagree completely.
The mcu part of the video aged poorly as hell
I despise Thor Ragnarok with a passion. So I am not at all excited about this.
Having change is definitely necessary in adaptation but it’s about knowing what and what not to alter. I can understand being interested in Waititi’s Akita but when looking at films like Thor: Ragnarok, it’s understandable to be apprehensive when the source material and director seem so oddly matched. It could work, but it makes sense to be sceptical. Films like The Lord of the Rings and Spider-Man have shown the effective use of directors from unexpected backgrounds, but when something is beloved, it was logical to be nervous back in the 00’s and it’s logical to be nervous now.
Well the original source material for Akira is a serialized story, while the movie is 2 hours. Which is entirely different than an television adaptation
Acuraccy always better. invincible proves it.
I would say the Shinning is better than Invincible.
I totally disagree with you here adaptations can be done well it doesn't have to be beat for beat however it should have strong faithfulness to the source by virtue changing mediums by default will prevent it from being beat for beat, i guess overall I have to say this video is cap.
“Accuracy isn’t better”
Yeah
Except in the example you showed
A perfect adaptation of the lord of the rings would be way worse than the Peter Jackson films, in my opinion.
Same with Harry Potter, both are long and slow (although hp is far more readable) and those are never good attributes for movies, even though both the books and movies are great. Many people would love a theoretical 12 hour movie that's an exact representation of the books, but they'd be incredibly dull and boring.
If you have 12 hours to spare for a book-faithful experience, just read the book