Am I allowed to be bored by the predictability of hatchett jobs on TV/Movie adaptions.

PlacidCasual

PlacidCasual

PlacidCasual

Soldato
Joined
13 May 2003
Posts
8,973
So the latest Sandman trailer has dropped and they've sex swapped Lucifer. You know what it doesn't matter to the plot because the angels and fallen angels are basically sexless anyway. I've just grown bored of the predictable an unnecessary sex swaps in every TV adaption whether they're necessary or not.

I'm reading the DMZ comic and enjoying it, I looked at the trialer for the TV show and it's a different story with similar pyjamas on. They're buying intellectual property with the intention of iimediately changing it.

The Boys was a plainly unfilmable comic but they've stolen a single element of the comic and built a new story around it with a few names being the same on pretty much different characters.

The list goes on, I guess its a problem as old as the movie business but I'd begun to get used to TV delivering some moderately faithfull adaptions and now everything seems to be in full retreat the genius's in the production company know more than the original writer they paid handsomely in the first place and can "improve" it.
 
Last edited:
While I can understand someone picking up the sandman, as it's a classic, I would have thought it's largely unfilmable.

I decided against watching Lucifer for exactly that reason.
 
@JRS As I said it doesn't really matter in that case it is an androgynous character, and if Neil Gaiman is happy that's fine. For me I saw it and just thought "really again". It's less that specific case than the drip drip of increasingly crappy adaptions.
 
PlacidCasual said:
@JRS As I said it doesn't really matter in that case it is an androgynous character, and if Neil Gaiman is happy that's fine. For me I saw it and just thought "really again". It's less that specific case than the drip drip of increasingly crappy adaptions.
Click to expand...

Yeah. To a point I agree. If the adaptation is crappy then it's bad. If the person they chose to play a part sucks then it's bad.

But I very clearly remember the wailing, gnashing of teeth and general BS in fandumb ahead of the first Thor MCU film and Idris Elba as Heimdall. And every single scene he was in could, quite literally, have been subtitled "That's Why We Cast The Black Guy"...

Hint - the bad adaptations are bad because of the writing rather than the cast ;)
 
Fanbases generally seem to have forgotten what the meaning of the word adaptation is. There are good and bad adaptations but things generally have to be changed to appear on a different form of media.
 
potatolord said:
While I can understand someone picking up the sandman, as it's a classic, I would have thought it's largely unfilmable.

I decided against watching Lucifer for exactly that reason.
Click to expand...
Watched Lucy with the wife, found it very entertaining, I'd never read the comic, so couldn't be disappointed.
Ellis who plays Lucy is great, very very amusing in the role.
 
Shamikebab said:
I love Lucifer too, it's almost completely different to the comics but I love that too.
Click to expand...
I don't even think of the TV show as an adaption of the comic. I appreciate it is, with characters like Mazikeen and having the nightclub, but nothing else about it follows the comic. The guy that plays Lucifer is great but he is plainly not playing the same character as the comic. This should definetly fit the mould for hatchett job of an adaption but the TV show has a lot of charm and doesn't detract from the original because it is sooooo different.

edit: so many typos blaming my keyboard
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom