Honestly, sometimes I hate it when you turn a medium into live action

[CrimsonGenius]

It doesn’t translate well.

 

[Valmond]

You angry at Disney?

 

[Jerynboe]

You angry at Disney?

The mouse is of course guilty of many crimes, but the majority of anime adaptations to live action are also not held in particularly high regards. Of course there’s also the more fundamental problem that adaptation is hard to do well in general.

 

[Valmond]

The mouse is of course guilty of many crimes, but the majority of anime adaptations to live action are also not held in particularly high regards. Of course there’s also the more fundamental problem that adaptation is hard to do well in general.

True, when I see live action. I just avoid them since I expect them to be bad.

 

[Scaletalon]

Tbh, it really depends on how it's executed. It doesn't matter if it's an anime, 3d animated etc. If you have bad writers that aren't able to remain faithful to the source material or make a new good version of the original then it will always lead to the same thing. A bad adaptation.

 

[CrimsonGenius]

You angry at Disney?

Disney will always be on the loath list. live action is not the only thing I’m mad about them about.

It’s just you get a live action, then you wonder who could fit the character? The answer no one unless you make a machine that brings 2d to the real world then you worry about sentience and rights for those characters in the real world.

The point is, people age if you are you trying for so many seasons. At this point Law and Order SVU should change to an animated format just so you can bring back people with new voices and no contracts.

 

[John_Owl]

True, when I see live action. I just avoid them since I expect them to be bad.

I try to judge them independently of source material. "The book is better than the movie!!" Well, first off, duh. Secondly, consider it to be it's own universe separate from the books. it's NOT a remake but a telling of a parallel (but different) universe. that's why the MCU is the Marvel Cinematic UNIVERSE. because it's not a remake of the comic universes, it's a completely different universe in the same multi-verse.

I view live-action remakes similarly. And I started this when I first watched the live-action aladdin. Will Smith is a terrible impersonation of ROBIN'S Genie. But he is an excellent SMITH genie. And I'm sure they would've LOVED to have Williams reprise his role. But sadly, heaven is a bit beyond even disney's budget (but if anyone could, it would certainly be them).

That said, there are certainly bad live-action movies that are terrible in-and-of-themselves, even viewed through an independent lens (Little Mermaid had TERRIBLE cgi for what disney is capable of, but I'm mostly looking at the Dragon Ball live-action adaptation).

 

[Viator]

The key is to go in with no expectations. You have to let it be it's own thing if you're going to enjoy it. Otherwise, disappointment is almost always inevitable.

 

[Valmond]

I try to judge them independently of source material. "The book is better than the movie!!" Well, first off, duh. Secondly, consider it to be it's own universe separate from the books. it's NOT a remake but a telling of a parallel (but different) universe. that's why the MCU is the Marvel Cinematic UNIVERSE. because it's not a remake of the comic universes, it's a completely different universe in the same multi-verse.

I view live-action remakes similarly. And I started this when I first watched the live-action aladdin. Will Smith is a terrible impersonation of ROBIN'S Genie. But he is an excellent SMITH genie. And I'm sure they would've LOVED to have Williams reprise his role. But sadly, heaven is a bit beyond even disney's budget (but if anyone could, it would certainly be them).

That said, there are certainly bad live-action movies that are terrible in-and-of-themselves, even viewed through an independent lens (Little Mermaid had TERRIBLE cgi for what disney is capable of, but I'm mostly looking at the Dragon Ball live-action adaptation).

Well yes, but that’s the thing. Time is limited, so I don’t bother potentially wasting it. It is just every live action I have seen, I ended up disliking it.

So, I don’t bother with it anymore. The way I typically see them now, is when someone puts it on in the family.

Other than that, I just look for basically anything else.

 

[cabbag3]

I think part of the whole point is to appeal to people who don't care for , let's say anime. Like me.
And also, that industry is risk averse. There's the fear of wasting money on original IP.

 

[John_Owl]

Well yes, but that’s the thing. Time is limited, so I don’t bother potentially wasting it. It is just every live action I have seen, I ended up disliking it.

So, I don’t bother with it anymore. The way I typically see them now, is when someone puts it on in the family.

Other than that, I just look for basically anything else.

to each their own

I've seen worse animated movies and shows, and wasted years reading mind-numbing BS. So while time is limited, I don't really mind. I've spent time learning useless skill, like card throwing. I've spent time learning useful skills like blacksmithing and archery. Because I wanted my books to be more authentic. So using time watching even a bad adaptation isn't a waste for me - it's just a lesson on what NOT to do. Heck, one of my first books was written in spite because I was forced to watch The Twilight Saga.

 

[AnonUnlimited]

For me it's one piece. It just looks terrible in real life.

 

[JayMark]

A huge advantage to animation is the ability to convey ideas that can't be easily expressed in film. This is why live adaptations sometimes don't translate well. Throw in uncalled for changes to the source material to compound the issue.

 

[Valmond]

to each their own

I've seen worse animated movies and shows, and wasted years reading mind-numbing BS. So while time is limited, I don't really mind. I've spent time learning useless skill, like card throwing. I've spent time learning useful skills like blacksmithing and archery. Because I wanted my books to be more authentic. So using time watching even a bad adaptation isn't a waste for me - it's just a lesson on what NOT to do. Heck, one of my first books was written in spite because I was forced to watch The Twilight Saga.

You too with Twilight?

Did you also thought you were safe, just for there to be a marathon that day, and couldn’t leave because you were trying to be kind?

 

[Tsuru]

It doesn’t translate well.

Joke on you, all CNs (chinese novels) are basically written to look like live-action




but people create manhuas that are mangaish and DESTROY the potential it could have brought to IP

 

[Daitengu]

Game movies are like 95% bad. But I think it's more the not understanding or not caring what made the game great and translating it properly.

 

[Clo]

I am super satisfied with Battle Angel Alita's movie adaptation.

It's not 100% accurate, but it kept the heart. And that's what's mattered.

Generally I prefer any stories told in the original format, but I often discover them via some other format. A lot of anime lead me to read the novels behind them, for example.

 

[John_Owl]

You too with Twilight?

Did you also thought you were safe, just for their to be a marathon that day, and could leave because you were trying to be kind?

nah, I didn't mind most of the problems people had with the movies. My only real issue was the sparkly vampires. Which I get. She tried a change to lore and it wasn't to my tastes. I was 19 (my girlfriend's mother required me to see it as a condition of living with them at the time), and was full of depression an anger. So I took it out on twilight by spite-writing my first real story. But I've moved beyond that and learned to write from different emotions than simply "I HATED THAT MOVIE! I'LL DO IT BETTER!"

And no, my girlfriend's mother LOVES twilight (to her, best series ever made). I was in "love", so would be willing to do anything at the time, including watching the movies.

 

[sbdrag]

The 2005 Constantine is an excellent film - and I hate it with a burning passion for being an absolutely terrible adaptation of the comic character Constantine despite being well made. Actually, I hate it more because I know if it wasn't a Constantine adaptation, I would have loved it.

On the other hand, I genuinely really loved the new live-action Yu Yu Hakusho - but I think it helped that they didn't try to Americanize it like they did with Death Note and Dragon Ball. I can only enjoy the Howl's Moving Castle film by thinking of it as Howl's POV of the book's events (they cut a lot of my favorite parts and changed things I didn't personally like - Marcus was an adult in the book, which makes more sense, really. Can you actually picture Howl caring for a child at the beginning of the story?).

So yeah - like others have said, a lot of what goes into a good adaptation is whether it's faithful to the original (not necessarily in 100% story accuracy but the core themes/etc) and if it's a well-made story in its own right. One of the reasons Disney is moving to "live action" is to continue underpaying VFX artists - because if it's "live action", it's not animated, and they can't make a bid to join the Animation Guild or an animation union. (VFX has no guilds or union, which makes it one of the highest risk/lowest reward/least security jobs in the films industry.) So yeah in addition to being blatant nostalgia cash grabs, they're also just... general cash grabs, rather than a genuine attempt to readapt a story for a new medium.

Another thing adaptations can fail at is trying to stick too close to the source material - the biggest critique I heard of the live action Cowboy Bebop was that they recreated the anime shot for shot which... does not look good in live action. Like, they were pretty meticulous about replicating the costumes and everything, but they didn't adapt to their medium in a way that really brought the story to life in that medium. This can also be seen in adapting comics to animation - DC very consistently tries to replicate comic styles in their newer animation, and a lot of times, it looks stiff and awkward because comics don't move, so their art style is adapted to a static medium. A simplified style (like the classic B:TAS, Justice League, etc) tends to read better in animation because it's more fluid and allows for my dynamic motion.

And the same thing happens with live-action - they focus on replicating animation instead of adapting it for the medium it's in. Ironically, I actually think one of the biggest problems with the live-action Beauty and the Beast is that it's very often staged like a stage play, but it's not shot like a stage play, which creates these big empty sets during sequences that are supposed to be full of life and energy. But it's also a bid to recreate the animated sequences, which... doesn't carry the same energy in live action, and needs to be changed accordingly for medium.

tl;dr: two of the biggest reasons adaptations end up bad are a failure to understand the source material and a failure to adapt the source material for the specific medium it's being adapted to

 

[Valmond]

nah, I didn't mind most of the problems people had with the movies. My only real issue was the sparkly vampires. Which I get. She tried a change to lore and it wasn't to my tastes. I was 19 (my girlfriend's mother required me to see it as a condition of living with them at the time), and was full of depression an anger. So I took it out on twilight by spite-writing my first real story. But I've moved beyond that and learned to write from different emotions than simply "I HATED THAT MOVIE! I'LL DO IT BETTER!"

And no, my girlfriend's mother LOVES twilight (to her, best series ever made). I was in "love", so would be willing to do anything at the time, including watching the movies.

I once made a joke in the 19th chapter of my first book. Where the second main was questioned on why he decided to disguise himself as a vampire out of all the creatures he could have done.

His response? He said they are cool, at least that’s what the young folks seem into nowadays. ?