It's 12 episodes of about 25 minutes each. So by far the most in-depth adaptation of the story I've seen in Live Action. Like the movies the origin story part takes up half the runtime. So binged it almost feels like two movies, an origin story and then the main story.
It reminds me a good deal of The Caesars, being a Black and White 60s BBC production that basically feels like filmed mini plays. I happen to really like that, but some people might find the stageiness of it awkward at times. It might have some actors in common with The Caesars, but I'm unsure. The acting was all very good.
I thought I recognized the voice of the actor playing Villefort but couldn't put my finger on it. Then I watched the credits for one episode and it's Michael Gough, who was Alfred in the Burton and Shumacker films, as well as two BBC Radio dramas, one being an adaptation of Knightfall.
As you may already know, a main reason I wanted to see this was it being the only dramatization of the story to include both Eugenie Danglars and Louise d'Armilly. They aren't in it a lot of course, but all things considered I feel they handled them well. I would have liked Louise to be blonde but that is superficial.
In general I felt the female characters got to shine more then they usually do, even Gankutsuou falls into too many Anime gender issues.
It does take some liberties, but is overall the most faithful adaptation of the story. Only one to keep Danglars being the one spared at the end, and the only one that has Edumund end up with Haydee. Gankutsuou is still great, being the most Epic feeling version, and in plenty of areas still more in-depth. So picking between those two isn't easy.
Showing posts with label The Count of Monte-Cristo. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Count of Monte-Cristo. Show all posts
Sunday, May 7, 2017
Tuesday, April 25, 2017
Live Action adaptations of Anime should be Serialized
My love of Anime greatly overlaps with my love of serialized fiction. And since people are looking for a common denominator to why Live Action adaptations of Anime, particularly Western/Hollywood ones (PGSM is pretty well received), tend to fail. I think it may be a good idea to look at how they tend to be based on Anime that was serialized originally, but abandon that structure for being a simple 90 minute to 2 Hour film, or hopefully a series of them.
Death Note is the current hot topic on the subject of Anime being adapted into live action. I don't know if the Netflix Death Note is going to be a series like the Marvel Defenders shows or just a movie, I've heard it called both.
There have been two Live Action adaptations of Death Note in Japan, a fact I've mentioned before. A Pair of movies, and then more recently a TV series in 2015. Both have their strengths and weaknesses in how the adapted the story and cast the characters. But the 2015 series edges out as the better one for me precisely because it was a TV series and was somewhat able to capture the original story structure better, and had more time.
Anime itself is often adapted from other source material. If it's Manga it's definitely best serialized. Some feel the weaknesses of the Akira movie come from needing to cut a lot by condensing the story to just a film.
Meanwhile Gankutsuou is in my view the absolute best adaptation of The Count of Monte-Cristo I've seen, in-spite of how much it changes including dropping my personal favorite story-line by dropping Louise d'Armilly, because it is Serialized like Dumas original novel was.
On the other hand it may be that most of these much decried Light Novel adaptations would have been better off if they'd been movies instead of TV Series-es. Both Sword Art Online and The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya changed the structure to fit the format by having the short stories of their second novel pad out the plot of the first. I happen to like how the first Arc of SAO was structured in the Anime, and I don't hate Haruhi's, but The Disappearance of Haruhi Suzumiya does feel like a much more satisfying Anime. And I love that it was an animated movie willing to be nearly a full three hours.
Meanwhile the light novel Washio Sumi wa Yuusha de Aru is being split into three less then 50 minute movies, when perhaps it would have worked better to just be one big movie.
But an adaptation of Noir, or Witch Hunter Robin that left out the case/mission of the week format of the first part of the story I don't think could work. Likewise with the Monster of the Week format of most of the Magical Girl genre.
I could maybe see Code Geass or Gundam 00 working as films if you made three movies of three hours each for each season, but that would be a huge investment.
There is still a bias to seeing a Big Screen movie as the ultimate goal of any franchise. I do love the Big Screen and wish I could watch something more serialized on it. But is it worth how it changes the nature of a story since we can't really be serialized on it?
Back in the day Movie Theater serials were a thing, but the advent of TV caused them to die out. A lot of serialized Anime is kind of more like what the old serials were then your average Western TV show. Like Code Geass, Gundam, Eva and other Mecha shows, and perhaps to an extent Death Game animes like Future Diary and Fate/Zero or Unlimited Blade Works. And also Dragonball Z with the whole 20 episodes for one fight meme. And Attack on Titan. I could maybe add Madlax. I'm still not too familiar with Space Opera animes like Legends of the Galactic Heroes.
A lot of DC fans feel DC on Television is satisfying them more then the movies right now. And the people who had the rights to George R. R. Martin's Saga of Fire and Ice knew that TV would suite that story better, and that decision paid off.
When you adapt a serialized story to a movie format two things happen. You will probably have less screen time to work with. And the very structure of the story changes. Either one of those could result in lovable minor characters being dropped, and similar loss of nuance. Together it's pretty much guaranteed.
Caprica was a TV show that it really saddens me failed. It appealed to me for some of the same reasons SAO does.
I've already said I feel Hellsing could be a good fit for the BBC.
Slice of Life shows could make good Sit-Coms, particularly Dragon-Maid, though I'd hate the thought of Lucky Star or K-On with a laugh tract or studio audience.
And I'd like it if ABC Fam.... excuse me FreeForm, could replace the soon ending Pretty Little Liars with a live action Pretty Cure.
Death Note is the current hot topic on the subject of Anime being adapted into live action. I don't know if the Netflix Death Note is going to be a series like the Marvel Defenders shows or just a movie, I've heard it called both.
There have been two Live Action adaptations of Death Note in Japan, a fact I've mentioned before. A Pair of movies, and then more recently a TV series in 2015. Both have their strengths and weaknesses in how the adapted the story and cast the characters. But the 2015 series edges out as the better one for me precisely because it was a TV series and was somewhat able to capture the original story structure better, and had more time.
Anime itself is often adapted from other source material. If it's Manga it's definitely best serialized. Some feel the weaknesses of the Akira movie come from needing to cut a lot by condensing the story to just a film.
Meanwhile Gankutsuou is in my view the absolute best adaptation of The Count of Monte-Cristo I've seen, in-spite of how much it changes including dropping my personal favorite story-line by dropping Louise d'Armilly, because it is Serialized like Dumas original novel was.
On the other hand it may be that most of these much decried Light Novel adaptations would have been better off if they'd been movies instead of TV Series-es. Both Sword Art Online and The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya changed the structure to fit the format by having the short stories of their second novel pad out the plot of the first. I happen to like how the first Arc of SAO was structured in the Anime, and I don't hate Haruhi's, but The Disappearance of Haruhi Suzumiya does feel like a much more satisfying Anime. And I love that it was an animated movie willing to be nearly a full three hours.
Meanwhile the light novel Washio Sumi wa Yuusha de Aru is being split into three less then 50 minute movies, when perhaps it would have worked better to just be one big movie.
But an adaptation of Noir, or Witch Hunter Robin that left out the case/mission of the week format of the first part of the story I don't think could work. Likewise with the Monster of the Week format of most of the Magical Girl genre.
I could maybe see Code Geass or Gundam 00 working as films if you made three movies of three hours each for each season, but that would be a huge investment.
There is still a bias to seeing a Big Screen movie as the ultimate goal of any franchise. I do love the Big Screen and wish I could watch something more serialized on it. But is it worth how it changes the nature of a story since we can't really be serialized on it?
Back in the day Movie Theater serials were a thing, but the advent of TV caused them to die out. A lot of serialized Anime is kind of more like what the old serials were then your average Western TV show. Like Code Geass, Gundam, Eva and other Mecha shows, and perhaps to an extent Death Game animes like Future Diary and Fate/Zero or Unlimited Blade Works. And also Dragonball Z with the whole 20 episodes for one fight meme. And Attack on Titan. I could maybe add Madlax. I'm still not too familiar with Space Opera animes like Legends of the Galactic Heroes.
A lot of DC fans feel DC on Television is satisfying them more then the movies right now. And the people who had the rights to George R. R. Martin's Saga of Fire and Ice knew that TV would suite that story better, and that decision paid off.
When you adapt a serialized story to a movie format two things happen. You will probably have less screen time to work with. And the very structure of the story changes. Either one of those could result in lovable minor characters being dropped, and similar loss of nuance. Together it's pretty much guaranteed.
Caprica was a TV show that it really saddens me failed. It appealed to me for some of the same reasons SAO does.
I've already said I feel Hellsing could be a good fit for the BBC.
Slice of Life shows could make good Sit-Coms, particularly Dragon-Maid, though I'd hate the thought of Lucky Star or K-On with a laugh tract or studio audience.
And I'd like it if ABC Fam.... excuse me FreeForm, could replace the soon ending Pretty Little Liars with a live action Pretty Cure.
Tuesday, August 16, 2016
Movies being too long, vs movies being too short.
One common criticism of certain movies I'm not inclined to agree with is criticizing a movie for being too long. It is my biggest disagreement with the film reviews of James Rolfe (The Angry Video Game Nerd formally known as the Angry Nintendo Nerd).
I like long movies, I like things fleshed out, I prefer adaptations that add (like Prince Caspian) to adaptations that remove. Those are general rules though and there are exceptions, I do feel there are times when a movie can be longer then it's story justifies. And I do think over 4 hours is too much to be watched in one uninterrupted sitting.
But thing is I tend to lean towards being interested in the kinds of stories that would need longer lengths to begin with.
The reason studios want shorter movies, considering 90 minutes enough to qualify as feature length, making 2 hours about the average and rarely allowing any blockbuster with a high budget because of action, adventure, SciFi or Fantasy elements to near or pass the 3 hour mark, is purely financial. They want movies shorter not because they think audiences will like them less but because a shorter movie can have more showings on the same screen.
But it seems simply that being the standard has conditioned some people to think that's how it should be. But Gone with the Wind, Sound of Music, Wizard of Oz, Mary Poppins, The Ten Commandments and Ben-Hur were long movies that audiences were willing to sit through. Not to mention most of Shakespeare's plays were written to be 3-4 or even 5 hour experiences. But now prices to see movies have gone up while longer films have become less common.
To me if a movie's story doesn't justify 2 hours it doesn't justify the Big Screen, that should be a 2 part episode of a TV series or a made for TV movie.
And it annoys me that Oscar Bait kinds of movies are allowed 3 hours far more often then Comic Book or Pulp inspired movies. I feel it is the action and adventure that helps justify a longer length. I'm more likely to be bored by a movie without that stuff going on forever. None the less I like The Godfather films.
But to show that even I have standards, I will list the handful of examples where I felt a film was longer then it needed to be.
The Hobbit movies, mainly the second and third, the first was relatively fine. LOTR was absolutely worthy of 3 three hour Theatrical films and 4 hour extended edition DVDs. But The Hobbit is a very different kind of story, you can maybe justify splitting it in two films. But this length issue overlaps with wanting it more like LOTR in tone also, The Hobbit is a simpler more fun and comical story. It gets a little dark at a certain point, but it really stands out when that darkness happens.
Related to that, but I can't judge entirely since I haven't watched any of them. But I feel like anytime a YA novel series last book gets split in two for the adaptation it is simply going to cause it to drag. Whether it's Harry Potter, or Twilight Breaking Dawn, or The Hunger Games, or Divergent, though I don't recall if the Divergent films did that or not.
Also Peter Jackson's King Kong from 2005. And again I have other issues besides the length, and overall I like it. But such a simple story didn't need LOTR length. Now I'm all for making it longer then the 1933 original film. Most of what I'd remove is probably stuff from before we first see Kong, 40-50 minutes before we see him works, you do want to build that up, but over an hour is too much. After that I'd cut the voice over quoting that really racist novel, and do what I could to trim the overblown T-Rex battle, 3 T-Rexes was overkill.
Once again, I'm forced to mention the existence of Superman Returns, I don't like being a hater. A shorter length would hardly save this film, but it's notable that it is the only film that is under 3 hours that is still able to make me of all people think it was longer then it's story justified.
A Superman movie absolutely could justify being that long or longer, but not without an actual super powered villain for him to fight. A remake (disguised as a sequel) of Superman The Movie doesn't need more screen time then the original, especially when it lacks the mini-movies about Krypton and Smallville. It's also the biggest offender in my book in going on too long after it's climax. It's justified for ROTK because it's the end of 3 movies not just one. Batman Begins was a little shorter and it felt like more happened. The Dark Knight was the same length and it's my favorite movie, it felt like a 5 act play, not 3 stretched out acts.
Last, let's discus a movie that I am on many levels conflicted towards. Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice.
It's Ultimate Cut is 3 Hours, how do I feel about that? For the DVD it's fine, like the LOTR extended versions or Watchmen, that extra stuff on the DVD versions aren't needed but they are fun. For home viewing you can pause the movie to take a break, to use the restroom or eat something, or in this film's case watch funny YouTube videos to relieve the stress. You can also skip scenes you personally don't like but that others might appreciate.
But theatrically, no. A Batman/Superman crossover film absolutely could justify three hours in my opinion, if it had some levity and brightness and overall more variety in the emotions in evokes. At one time I felt like The Dark Knight Returns would have needed 3 and a half hours, but upon watching how well it was done as two 70 minute animated films, I now feel it wouldn't need more time then The Dark Knight Rises even if you made a point to do more then those Cartoons combined did.
However what I would cut and keep for the theatrical version would be different.
As much as I love the Injustice like Future Vision and then immediately The Flash trying to tell Bruce something from the Future. We don't need that, what it tells us about Bruce's motivations we more then got from seeing his experience at the beginning and what he says to Alfred. So I'd cut that or at least trim it down to a 30 second montage. Also when Diana opens the file Bruce sent her taken from Lex, I'd show the three logos, that's all the Justice League tease we needed, I'd save her watching the three videos for the DVD extended edition.
What isn't in the Theatrical version and that I'd still keep out is first the Steppinwolf scene, it looks cool but isn't needed, and only a subset of even nerds recognized the character. And I'd keep Batman confronting Lex in Prison as it was theatrically, adding the reference to Arkham is cool for Nerds but wasn't needed. That scene as it was theatrically gives us all the future movie threat set up we need. And since she wound up not being a comics character, Jena Malone's scenes weren't needed, they just elaborated on Lois's story-line which was handled fine in the theatrical cut.
What the Theatrical Cut absolutely did need was the additional Screen-time and Dialogue for Clark Kent/Superman, the actual main character, especially his investigation of Batman. It needed the elaboration on what happened in Africa at the beginning as much as I hate confirming that CIA agent to be Jimmy. It needed showing that the branded criminals being killed in prison was orchestrated by KGBeast presumably on Lex's orders. And it needed the additional stuff with the woman from Africa and the Senator, and her being killed.
I could go either way on the football game.
That hypothetical edit might still be longer then the theatrical cut we got, I'm unsure. And it wouldn't save the film's joylessness problem. But it would be a far better film.
But I ultimately feel like there are far more films that needed more time to flesh out their details, then there are films that dragged too much. In general I feel if you want the film to end you're simply not enjoying it, and if you don't want it to you are enjoying it.
For some reason the first example of one to pop in my mind is usually The Haunting of Molly Hartley. It's not exactly a film others would think of in terms of run-time debates at all. But I really like the premise, it's an Omen like tale but with a young woman, and I enjoyed most of it as is. I would end it's narrative sooner actually, the ending graduation and putting in her dad in the institution scenes it didn't need. I wouldn't add anything to the first act or maybe even first half, but it does need more fleshing out and development before we reach the climactic sequence.
Batman Forever is a movie I like as is, but could be a much better film if you add all the DVD deleted scenes and re-arrange the first act so the sequence of events is more like in the novelizations. I've heard there are Fan-Edits that have done this, I haven't gotten to view them yet because torrents are to complicated for me. I wish there were streaming sites like pirated Anime has for Fan-Edits of Hollywood films with available deleted scenes and/or disputed length issues.
Superman IV The Quest for Peace could be similar, but not all it's deleted scenes are found and many lack needed polishing. I also had an imaginary ideal edit of Superman II in my head once, which may be longer then either the Lester or Donner cut. I'll need to watch them both again to fully remember what it was. The deleted scenes that made neither cut were also a factor, though I wouldn't add all of em.
The movie version of the Les Miserables Musical is as it is in my top 10 movies of all time easily. But the thing is I like everything added that wasn't in the original Musical, but lament that other stuff got removed because they still wanted the total run-time to be the same.
Every movie version of The Count of Monte-Cristo. I think it's an uphill battle enough as is to try telling the story as a stand alone single movie rather then a more serialized format. But every attempt becomes more pathetic then it needed to be by not allowing itself to go over 2 hours, while at the same time not skipping the Origin Story part. If you are going to include the backstory, it should be a 3rd to a 4th of the story, not half of it.
My opinion of Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of The Sith is interesting, it is overall by far the best of the Star Wars movies. Yet it is also the only Prequel, in fact the only George Lucas produced Star Wars film, I have any real criticisms of at all. Those issues mostly relate to it's handling of female characters.
Much of that could be fixed by adding not all of the deleted scenes, but just the origin of the Rebellion plot-line. It gives Padme Amdiala, the female lead of the trilogy, something to do in the first half. Same with Bail Organa so his becoming a main protagonist during the second half doesn't come out of nowhere. And Mon Mothma being in the film would give it more female representation. It would give context to when Padme tells Anakin about feeling like they might be on the wrong side. And the last scene that also adds another Palpatine and Anakin scene has him plant the seed to distrust Padme giving more context to his getting paranoid and force choking her at the end.
Many old movies of the 30s and early 40s, like some Warner Gangster and Universal monster films, I feel are kept from true greatness only by lacking more time to flesh out their stories.
I could and might make a separate post on the issues many DC Animated movies have from being limited to 70 Minutes (Especially Year One).
I think there is a chance The Incredible Hulk could have been saved by adding some of it's deleted scenes. Many including the suicide scene didn't even make the DVD special features, and I now think that is best left as a story he tells in The Avengers. I really like the movie as it is. But it particularly annoys me anytime a Superhero film is under two hours.
I'm sure I'll later think of more examples that I'll be mad at myself for not remembering now.
I like long movies, I like things fleshed out, I prefer adaptations that add (like Prince Caspian) to adaptations that remove. Those are general rules though and there are exceptions, I do feel there are times when a movie can be longer then it's story justifies. And I do think over 4 hours is too much to be watched in one uninterrupted sitting.
But thing is I tend to lean towards being interested in the kinds of stories that would need longer lengths to begin with.
The reason studios want shorter movies, considering 90 minutes enough to qualify as feature length, making 2 hours about the average and rarely allowing any blockbuster with a high budget because of action, adventure, SciFi or Fantasy elements to near or pass the 3 hour mark, is purely financial. They want movies shorter not because they think audiences will like them less but because a shorter movie can have more showings on the same screen.
But it seems simply that being the standard has conditioned some people to think that's how it should be. But Gone with the Wind, Sound of Music, Wizard of Oz, Mary Poppins, The Ten Commandments and Ben-Hur were long movies that audiences were willing to sit through. Not to mention most of Shakespeare's plays were written to be 3-4 or even 5 hour experiences. But now prices to see movies have gone up while longer films have become less common.
To me if a movie's story doesn't justify 2 hours it doesn't justify the Big Screen, that should be a 2 part episode of a TV series or a made for TV movie.
And it annoys me that Oscar Bait kinds of movies are allowed 3 hours far more often then Comic Book or Pulp inspired movies. I feel it is the action and adventure that helps justify a longer length. I'm more likely to be bored by a movie without that stuff going on forever. None the less I like The Godfather films.
But to show that even I have standards, I will list the handful of examples where I felt a film was longer then it needed to be.
The Hobbit movies, mainly the second and third, the first was relatively fine. LOTR was absolutely worthy of 3 three hour Theatrical films and 4 hour extended edition DVDs. But The Hobbit is a very different kind of story, you can maybe justify splitting it in two films. But this length issue overlaps with wanting it more like LOTR in tone also, The Hobbit is a simpler more fun and comical story. It gets a little dark at a certain point, but it really stands out when that darkness happens.
Related to that, but I can't judge entirely since I haven't watched any of them. But I feel like anytime a YA novel series last book gets split in two for the adaptation it is simply going to cause it to drag. Whether it's Harry Potter, or Twilight Breaking Dawn, or The Hunger Games, or Divergent, though I don't recall if the Divergent films did that or not.
Also Peter Jackson's King Kong from 2005. And again I have other issues besides the length, and overall I like it. But such a simple story didn't need LOTR length. Now I'm all for making it longer then the 1933 original film. Most of what I'd remove is probably stuff from before we first see Kong, 40-50 minutes before we see him works, you do want to build that up, but over an hour is too much. After that I'd cut the voice over quoting that really racist novel, and do what I could to trim the overblown T-Rex battle, 3 T-Rexes was overkill.
Once again, I'm forced to mention the existence of Superman Returns, I don't like being a hater. A shorter length would hardly save this film, but it's notable that it is the only film that is under 3 hours that is still able to make me of all people think it was longer then it's story justified.
A Superman movie absolutely could justify being that long or longer, but not without an actual super powered villain for him to fight. A remake (disguised as a sequel) of Superman The Movie doesn't need more screen time then the original, especially when it lacks the mini-movies about Krypton and Smallville. It's also the biggest offender in my book in going on too long after it's climax. It's justified for ROTK because it's the end of 3 movies not just one. Batman Begins was a little shorter and it felt like more happened. The Dark Knight was the same length and it's my favorite movie, it felt like a 5 act play, not 3 stretched out acts.
Last, let's discus a movie that I am on many levels conflicted towards. Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice.
It's Ultimate Cut is 3 Hours, how do I feel about that? For the DVD it's fine, like the LOTR extended versions or Watchmen, that extra stuff on the DVD versions aren't needed but they are fun. For home viewing you can pause the movie to take a break, to use the restroom or eat something, or in this film's case watch funny YouTube videos to relieve the stress. You can also skip scenes you personally don't like but that others might appreciate.
But theatrically, no. A Batman/Superman crossover film absolutely could justify three hours in my opinion, if it had some levity and brightness and overall more variety in the emotions in evokes. At one time I felt like The Dark Knight Returns would have needed 3 and a half hours, but upon watching how well it was done as two 70 minute animated films, I now feel it wouldn't need more time then The Dark Knight Rises even if you made a point to do more then those Cartoons combined did.
However what I would cut and keep for the theatrical version would be different.
As much as I love the Injustice like Future Vision and then immediately The Flash trying to tell Bruce something from the Future. We don't need that, what it tells us about Bruce's motivations we more then got from seeing his experience at the beginning and what he says to Alfred. So I'd cut that or at least trim it down to a 30 second montage. Also when Diana opens the file Bruce sent her taken from Lex, I'd show the three logos, that's all the Justice League tease we needed, I'd save her watching the three videos for the DVD extended edition.
What isn't in the Theatrical version and that I'd still keep out is first the Steppinwolf scene, it looks cool but isn't needed, and only a subset of even nerds recognized the character. And I'd keep Batman confronting Lex in Prison as it was theatrically, adding the reference to Arkham is cool for Nerds but wasn't needed. That scene as it was theatrically gives us all the future movie threat set up we need. And since she wound up not being a comics character, Jena Malone's scenes weren't needed, they just elaborated on Lois's story-line which was handled fine in the theatrical cut.
What the Theatrical Cut absolutely did need was the additional Screen-time and Dialogue for Clark Kent/Superman, the actual main character, especially his investigation of Batman. It needed the elaboration on what happened in Africa at the beginning as much as I hate confirming that CIA agent to be Jimmy. It needed showing that the branded criminals being killed in prison was orchestrated by KGBeast presumably on Lex's orders. And it needed the additional stuff with the woman from Africa and the Senator, and her being killed.
I could go either way on the football game.
That hypothetical edit might still be longer then the theatrical cut we got, I'm unsure. And it wouldn't save the film's joylessness problem. But it would be a far better film.
But I ultimately feel like there are far more films that needed more time to flesh out their details, then there are films that dragged too much. In general I feel if you want the film to end you're simply not enjoying it, and if you don't want it to you are enjoying it.
For some reason the first example of one to pop in my mind is usually The Haunting of Molly Hartley. It's not exactly a film others would think of in terms of run-time debates at all. But I really like the premise, it's an Omen like tale but with a young woman, and I enjoyed most of it as is. I would end it's narrative sooner actually, the ending graduation and putting in her dad in the institution scenes it didn't need. I wouldn't add anything to the first act or maybe even first half, but it does need more fleshing out and development before we reach the climactic sequence.
Batman Forever is a movie I like as is, but could be a much better film if you add all the DVD deleted scenes and re-arrange the first act so the sequence of events is more like in the novelizations. I've heard there are Fan-Edits that have done this, I haven't gotten to view them yet because torrents are to complicated for me. I wish there were streaming sites like pirated Anime has for Fan-Edits of Hollywood films with available deleted scenes and/or disputed length issues.
Superman IV The Quest for Peace could be similar, but not all it's deleted scenes are found and many lack needed polishing. I also had an imaginary ideal edit of Superman II in my head once, which may be longer then either the Lester or Donner cut. I'll need to watch them both again to fully remember what it was. The deleted scenes that made neither cut were also a factor, though I wouldn't add all of em.
The movie version of the Les Miserables Musical is as it is in my top 10 movies of all time easily. But the thing is I like everything added that wasn't in the original Musical, but lament that other stuff got removed because they still wanted the total run-time to be the same.
Every movie version of The Count of Monte-Cristo. I think it's an uphill battle enough as is to try telling the story as a stand alone single movie rather then a more serialized format. But every attempt becomes more pathetic then it needed to be by not allowing itself to go over 2 hours, while at the same time not skipping the Origin Story part. If you are going to include the backstory, it should be a 3rd to a 4th of the story, not half of it.
My opinion of Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of The Sith is interesting, it is overall by far the best of the Star Wars movies. Yet it is also the only Prequel, in fact the only George Lucas produced Star Wars film, I have any real criticisms of at all. Those issues mostly relate to it's handling of female characters.
Much of that could be fixed by adding not all of the deleted scenes, but just the origin of the Rebellion plot-line. It gives Padme Amdiala, the female lead of the trilogy, something to do in the first half. Same with Bail Organa so his becoming a main protagonist during the second half doesn't come out of nowhere. And Mon Mothma being in the film would give it more female representation. It would give context to when Padme tells Anakin about feeling like they might be on the wrong side. And the last scene that also adds another Palpatine and Anakin scene has him plant the seed to distrust Padme giving more context to his getting paranoid and force choking her at the end.
Many old movies of the 30s and early 40s, like some Warner Gangster and Universal monster films, I feel are kept from true greatness only by lacking more time to flesh out their stories.
I could and might make a separate post on the issues many DC Animated movies have from being limited to 70 Minutes (Especially Year One).
I think there is a chance The Incredible Hulk could have been saved by adding some of it's deleted scenes. Many including the suicide scene didn't even make the DVD special features, and I now think that is best left as a story he tells in The Avengers. I really like the movie as it is. But it particularly annoys me anytime a Superhero film is under two hours.
I'm sure I'll later think of more examples that I'll be mad at myself for not remembering now.
Sunday, June 12, 2016
1838 is the most eventful year in the fictional history of France
You might have noticed this if you've been studying 19th century French Popular fiction and the French WNU.
Since real life history doesn't seem to mention much happening in France in 1838 at all. I figure this is likely to have happened from later authors homageing the first who probably picked that year at random.
It begins with Eugene Sue who effectively founded several new genres when he wrote The Mysteries of Paris, originally serialized in 1842-43. It's events are all set in 1838, and it was wildly successful.
Alexandre Dumas' The Count of Monte-Cristo was a project that began when he was prompted by his publisher to write something to copy the success of Sue's Mysteries of Paris. While the Novel's story spans from 1815-1844, the bulk of the main narrative, Dantes actually carrying out his revenge plan, pretty much everything that the Anime Gankutsuou adapts, is set in 1838, (as well as all the scenes featuring Eugenie Danglers and Louis d'Armilly). So pretty much everything people actually want to see.
Much later Paul Feval would write his Blackcoats saga. The second half of Salem Street and the entirety of The Invisible Weapon are set in 1838.
In the introduction for his translation of The Invisible Weapon Brian Stableford talks about how that novel is perhaps the most Suesque of Feval's novels, echoing many things Sue did but also doing them very differently. Most of the parallels he mentions are to The Wandering Jew besides that it features a character locked up in the same Paris prison as The Mysteries of Paris. But I think that it's being set the same year as The Mysteries of Paris is not likely to be a coincidence.
Spoiler for The Blackcoats novels ahead
Especially since setting those events in that year caused one of the major continuity hiccups of the saga. What we're told about Saladin in the original novel and Heart of Steel (written before) and The Companions of The Treasure (written after) place Saladin's birth in 1840, this novel alone contradicts that by featuring him in 1838.
There's no major reason you couldn't move the events of the novel up two or three years to fix that issue. But it'd still be a problem that it effectively depicts the break up of Echolat and Simolor before we ever meet them in the original novel. And makes one wonder why Maman Leo is completely absent for their story-lines in the events set in 1842 and early 43 in the first two novels.
Sue's second major novel was mostly set in 1832, that year was also of interest to later writers. But it has more real life historical significance due to the June Rebellion (fictionalized in Les Miserables by Victor Hugo) and other lingering aftermaths of the July Revolution. Dumas's novel set then (She-Wolves of Machecoul; The Last Vendée) was also based on real history of that year, and for Feval's secret history it's only the extended prologue of Heart of Steel, Marguerite's origin story, that is set during 1832, and is early in the year during Lent.
Since real life history doesn't seem to mention much happening in France in 1838 at all. I figure this is likely to have happened from later authors homageing the first who probably picked that year at random.
It begins with Eugene Sue who effectively founded several new genres when he wrote The Mysteries of Paris, originally serialized in 1842-43. It's events are all set in 1838, and it was wildly successful.
Alexandre Dumas' The Count of Monte-Cristo was a project that began when he was prompted by his publisher to write something to copy the success of Sue's Mysteries of Paris. While the Novel's story spans from 1815-1844, the bulk of the main narrative, Dantes actually carrying out his revenge plan, pretty much everything that the Anime Gankutsuou adapts, is set in 1838, (as well as all the scenes featuring Eugenie Danglers and Louis d'Armilly). So pretty much everything people actually want to see.
Much later Paul Feval would write his Blackcoats saga. The second half of Salem Street and the entirety of The Invisible Weapon are set in 1838.
In the introduction for his translation of The Invisible Weapon Brian Stableford talks about how that novel is perhaps the most Suesque of Feval's novels, echoing many things Sue did but also doing them very differently. Most of the parallels he mentions are to The Wandering Jew besides that it features a character locked up in the same Paris prison as The Mysteries of Paris. But I think that it's being set the same year as The Mysteries of Paris is not likely to be a coincidence.
Spoiler for The Blackcoats novels ahead
Especially since setting those events in that year caused one of the major continuity hiccups of the saga. What we're told about Saladin in the original novel and Heart of Steel (written before) and The Companions of The Treasure (written after) place Saladin's birth in 1840, this novel alone contradicts that by featuring him in 1838.
There's no major reason you couldn't move the events of the novel up two or three years to fix that issue. But it'd still be a problem that it effectively depicts the break up of Echolat and Simolor before we ever meet them in the original novel. And makes one wonder why Maman Leo is completely absent for their story-lines in the events set in 1842 and early 43 in the first two novels.
Sue's second major novel was mostly set in 1832, that year was also of interest to later writers. But it has more real life historical significance due to the June Rebellion (fictionalized in Les Miserables by Victor Hugo) and other lingering aftermaths of the July Revolution. Dumas's novel set then (She-Wolves of Machecoul; The Last Vendée) was also based on real history of that year, and for Feval's secret history it's only the extended prologue of Heart of Steel, Marguerite's origin story, that is set during 1832, and is early in the year during Lent.
Thursday, April 7, 2016
I watched Ben-Hur again yesterday
Since April 6th is the day I believe Jesus was Crucified on our Gregorian Calendar.
As an amateur historian and Bible Scholar, I could nitpick the heck out of this movie, and the book it's based on, starting with all the White Israelites, but I don't really wanna do that.
I have sometimes complained about how a lot of these old Biblical movies seem to kind of just make Jesus into Gahndi, and this has elements of that at times. But when Jesus was on The Cross, Balthazar talked about him dying for the sins of the world, so there is some at least vague knowledge of the actual Gospel there.
Today it's sometimes popular to mock the idea of never showing Jesus's Face or hearing Him talk directly. And I certainly understand the concern that that takes away His Humanity. But I've always been a fan of when films try to get as much as they can out of what you don't see.
One moment that really strikes me is after Jesus gives Judah the water and that Roman commander is about to stop him and Jesus just looks at him. The Roman doesn't seem to back down out of fear, he doesn't himself understand why he's stopping. That brief performance says a lot.
As someone who still supports Ron Paul on his foreign policy. Judah saying "Withdraw your legions" really speaks to me as a timelessly relevant line.
The film also depicts it's Arab characters very sympathetically, calling out Anti-Arab Racism. It's amazing how often old films pleasantly surprise me. Of course they don't seem to be played by actual middle eastern actors, but I'll take what I can get.
Though I can't say I'm too impressed with the handling of female characters.
On a shipping level, I think there is definitely more then meets the eye to the history between Judah and Messala.
Ben-Hur always makes me think of the Star Wars Prequels.
The most obvious and iconic example is the connection between the Chariot Race and the Pod Race.
But I also connect when Messala says "You're either with me, or your against me" to Anakin saying "you're either with me, or you're my enemy". I know that's a common expression, and the people politicizing the Prequels liked to draw the analogy mainly to George W Bush. But these two scenes also have in common two friends becoming enemies in this moment, so I don't think it's a coincidence.
Also Arius saying "Your eyes are filled with Hate, good, Hate keeps a man alive, it gives him strength" sounds like a good Sith motto.
Let's also talk about what was an influence on Ben-Hur.
Ben-Hur is also related to a genre largely codified by The Cont of Monte-Cristo, Revenge Fantasy. This was I think my first time watching the film since my obsession with French Pulp Fiction started. And the potential parallels between Judah and Edmund Dantes really jumped out at me.
There are two fictional stories that have iconic Galley Slave sequences associated with them, Ben-Hur and Les Miserables. I'd be curious to know which story it was associated with first, because Les Msierables came first but I'm pretty sure the specific Galley Slave part wasn't necessarily in the original Novel of either.
It's another old classic that still holds up. They don't make historical films like that anymore, that today we can do gritty and realistic historical films is great, but ya know with Comic Book movies (some) people have figured out that the grim and gritty appeal is limited. Why not bring back Historical films that are fun, theatrical, operatic, colorful and sometimes cheesy?
As an amateur historian and Bible Scholar, I could nitpick the heck out of this movie, and the book it's based on, starting with all the White Israelites, but I don't really wanna do that.
I have sometimes complained about how a lot of these old Biblical movies seem to kind of just make Jesus into Gahndi, and this has elements of that at times. But when Jesus was on The Cross, Balthazar talked about him dying for the sins of the world, so there is some at least vague knowledge of the actual Gospel there.
Today it's sometimes popular to mock the idea of never showing Jesus's Face or hearing Him talk directly. And I certainly understand the concern that that takes away His Humanity. But I've always been a fan of when films try to get as much as they can out of what you don't see.
One moment that really strikes me is after Jesus gives Judah the water and that Roman commander is about to stop him and Jesus just looks at him. The Roman doesn't seem to back down out of fear, he doesn't himself understand why he's stopping. That brief performance says a lot.
As someone who still supports Ron Paul on his foreign policy. Judah saying "Withdraw your legions" really speaks to me as a timelessly relevant line.
The film also depicts it's Arab characters very sympathetically, calling out Anti-Arab Racism. It's amazing how often old films pleasantly surprise me. Of course they don't seem to be played by actual middle eastern actors, but I'll take what I can get.
Though I can't say I'm too impressed with the handling of female characters.
On a shipping level, I think there is definitely more then meets the eye to the history between Judah and Messala.
Ben-Hur always makes me think of the Star Wars Prequels.
The most obvious and iconic example is the connection between the Chariot Race and the Pod Race.
But I also connect when Messala says "You're either with me, or your against me" to Anakin saying "you're either with me, or you're my enemy". I know that's a common expression, and the people politicizing the Prequels liked to draw the analogy mainly to George W Bush. But these two scenes also have in common two friends becoming enemies in this moment, so I don't think it's a coincidence.
Also Arius saying "Your eyes are filled with Hate, good, Hate keeps a man alive, it gives him strength" sounds like a good Sith motto.
Let's also talk about what was an influence on Ben-Hur.
Ben-Hur is also related to a genre largely codified by The Cont of Monte-Cristo, Revenge Fantasy. This was I think my first time watching the film since my obsession with French Pulp Fiction started. And the potential parallels between Judah and Edmund Dantes really jumped out at me.
There are two fictional stories that have iconic Galley Slave sequences associated with them, Ben-Hur and Les Miserables. I'd be curious to know which story it was associated with first, because Les Msierables came first but I'm pretty sure the specific Galley Slave part wasn't necessarily in the original Novel of either.
It's another old classic that still holds up. They don't make historical films like that anymore, that today we can do gritty and realistic historical films is great, but ya know with Comic Book movies (some) people have figured out that the grim and gritty appeal is limited. Why not bring back Historical films that are fun, theatrical, operatic, colorful and sometimes cheesy?
Monday, March 21, 2016
My story The Piano Maidens is now online
I have now made my story The Piano Maidens available online for free.
If you like it even mildly I ask you to still buy the Anthology, Tales of The Shadowmen Volume 12, to show support for BlackCoatPress, they are doing very important work and not yet had nearly the success they deserve.
I’m planning to write more stories with these characters in the future, any constructive criticism I wold greatly appreciate.
Tuesday, December 1, 2015
Tales of the Shadowmen 12 is now available to order. Including my story The Piano Maidens
Tales of the Shadowmen 12 is now available to order. Including my story The Piano Maidens, this is the most important story I’ve written thus far.
http://blackcoatpress.com/talesshadowmen12.htm
http://blackcoatpress.com/talesshadowmen12.htm
Friday, September 11, 2015
My Eugenie Danglars story will be in TOTS 12
Tales of The Shadowmen Volume 12
The Piano Maidens is much more like the kinds of stories I generally like to write then my prior two TOTS contributions. Because I generally like to write female leads/POV characters, and also really like including LGBT representation in my stories. This story is also a dialogue driven one, no action.
The story stars Eugenia Danglars and Louise d'Armilly from Alexandre Dumas' The Count of Monte-Cristo. They are Lesbians who were removed from the oldest English Translation of the Novel as well as most adaptations. But they are fully restored in the Penguin Classics translation. And in Matthew Baugh's The Vampire Count of Monte-Cristo.
I am depicting both of these characters as exclusively Monosexually Homosexual. In my Headcanon for these characters, and actual Canon of any stories I write, neither ever has or ever will be intimate with a man.
Like all TOTS stories it's also a crossover, It features and mentions a lot of both fictional and historical figures. It's a very Nerdy story.
I include a number of little Easter eggs only fellow PLL will get.
I hope actual Lesbians will be able to enjoy how I write these characters. So if any LGBT people read this story and has any criticism of it, please feel free to let me know. I'd really, really appreciate it if by some off chance Heather Hogan did a review of it.
The Book will come out this December, please buy the book, BlackCoatPress does a lot of important work, they deserve more success.
Other works from the same Publisher that should interest those of us who want more Female representation in Genre Fiction include Rick Lai's Shadows of The Opera and Sisters of The Shadows series. And Nina Cooper's translations of some early female lead detective and spy stories. And I of course always recommend Paul Feval as translated by Brian Stableford.
Once again I am last by virtue of the Alphabet.
US$22.95/GBP 14.99 - 6x9 tpb, 304 p. - ISBN-13: 978-1-61227-447-8
Contents:
Jason Scott Aiken: Ardan at the Pole starring Doc Ardan, The People of the Pole
Matthew Baugh: The Lament of the Duke and the King starring Doctor Omega
Adam Mudman Bezecny: The Revelation of the Yeti starring Doctor Omega, Nora, Ki-Gor
Nicholas Boving: The Evil Among Us starring Dr. Watson, Maigret, Father Brown
Nathan Cabaniss: House of El Hombre Loco starring Count Waldemar Daninsky, Dr. Génessier
Christophe Colin : Of Beasts and Men starring Felifax, Dr. Moreau
Matthew Dennion: Turning Point starring Sâr Dubnotal, Werewolf of Paris
Peter Gabbani: A Bond between Gentlemen starring Arsène Lupin, Raffles
Brian Gallagher: The Stake and the Sickle starring Captain Vampire, Von Bork
Martin Gately: Rouletabille on Mysterious Island starring Rouletabille
Travis Hiltz: The Case of the Curious Cadaver starring Spiridon, Van Helsing, Doctor Omega
Rick Lai: The Tomb of the Veiled Prophet starring The Phantom of the Opera,
Nigel Malcolm: The Adventure of the Orcival Rain starring Lecoq, Sherlock Holmes, Gourroull
Jean-Marc Mouiller: Behind the Mask of the Ripper starring Sherlock Holmes, Harry Dickson
Christofer Nigro: Justice and the Beast starring Judex, Doctor Cornelius, Professor Tornada
Pierrick Rival: The Inn of the First Voyage starring Long John Silver, Surcouf
Frank Schildiner: Ancient Space Lizards and Other Visitors starring Jean Kariven, Gussie Fink-Nottle
Sam Shook: The Eldritch Stones starring Sar Dubnotal, Chandu, El Borak
Michel Stéphan: The Submarine "Gustave Le Rouge" starring William Boltyn, Dr. Moreau
Artikel Unbekannt : Leonox Meets Mephista starring Mephista, Leonox
David L. Vineyard: The White Star of Atlantis starring Arsène Lupin, Terence O'Rourke
Jared Welch: The Piano Maidens starring Eugenie Danglars, The Black Coats
The Piano Maidens is much more like the kinds of stories I generally like to write then my prior two TOTS contributions. Because I generally like to write female leads/POV characters, and also really like including LGBT representation in my stories. This story is also a dialogue driven one, no action.
The story stars Eugenia Danglars and Louise d'Armilly from Alexandre Dumas' The Count of Monte-Cristo. They are Lesbians who were removed from the oldest English Translation of the Novel as well as most adaptations. But they are fully restored in the Penguin Classics translation. And in Matthew Baugh's The Vampire Count of Monte-Cristo.
I am depicting both of these characters as exclusively Monosexually Homosexual. In my Headcanon for these characters, and actual Canon of any stories I write, neither ever has or ever will be intimate with a man.
Like all TOTS stories it's also a crossover, It features and mentions a lot of both fictional and historical figures. It's a very Nerdy story.
I include a number of little Easter eggs only fellow PLL will get.
I hope actual Lesbians will be able to enjoy how I write these characters. So if any LGBT people read this story and has any criticism of it, please feel free to let me know. I'd really, really appreciate it if by some off chance Heather Hogan did a review of it.
The Book will come out this December, please buy the book, BlackCoatPress does a lot of important work, they deserve more success.
Other works from the same Publisher that should interest those of us who want more Female representation in Genre Fiction include Rick Lai's Shadows of The Opera and Sisters of The Shadows series. And Nina Cooper's translations of some early female lead detective and spy stories. And I of course always recommend Paul Feval as translated by Brian Stableford.
Sunday, January 25, 2015
My thoughts on Gankutsuou
Gankutsuou is an Anime that is based on The Count of Monte-Cristo, but which adapts the plot to a distant future setting with various Sci-Fi twists to the story.
I have recently watched it. The English Dub only, I prefer to avoid Subtitled versions if I can. It can be viewed for free on Hulu. Now all I need is some kind of western release for the Anime version of Les Miserables, and I'll have a pretty good handle on the history of Anime directly drawing on French literature/history.
I enjoyed it a great deal, all the voice actors were great, it shared a lot of common voice actors with the dub of Code Geass.
I like that it starts with when Albert and The Count meet. I feel that is ideally how modern versions of the story should start, all three Hollywood films I've seen spend half the movie on the origin story. Which in a two hour movies leaves little time for what we actually came to see.
I feel a serialized format is best for adapting something like The Count of Monte-Cristo, it was a serialized format originally, but people forget that.
It does follow the common rout of adaptations making him save Mondeago for last.
The biggest problems I have all come down to Eugenie Danglars. I enjoy this take on her character in many ways, but it takes away her being a Lesbian in favor of making her and Albert the romantic endgame.
Her Lesbian affair is frequently dropped from adaptations partly because of it being censored from the earliest translations, and partly for the same reason it was censored. I can't even decide if including Eugenie but changing her sexuality is worse then most adaptations that don't even include her.
In addition to the issue hurting the potential LGBT representation. I also consider it interesting how in the original novel the Junior Lead doesn't wind up with either of his love interests.
Eugenie's Lesbian history is possibly homaged by the fact that she at times has somewhat of a Bifauxnen look. I don't think the writers were ignorant of it, because the versions that censor that tend to also censor the opium sequence, which is referenced in a sense in this Anime.
It disappoints me because I felt it lent itself to an Anime trope quite well, the Yuri or GL genre. But I guess they felt Eugenie's seeming coldness to Albert lent itself to another romantic Anime trope, which I'd probably screw up the name of. Perhaps it didn't seem like a good Yuri story to them because of Eugenie being younger even though she would have to be the Seme.
The loss of a Lesbian character is perhaps counter acted by the fact that Franz is clearly in love with Albert. And also Peppo being some kind of either Trans or Intersex person.
But another problem with what ultimately happens to Eugenie is her becoming ultimately a Damsel in Distress. And experiencing something very disturbingly similar to a Rape.
I have recently watched it. The English Dub only, I prefer to avoid Subtitled versions if I can. It can be viewed for free on Hulu. Now all I need is some kind of western release for the Anime version of Les Miserables, and I'll have a pretty good handle on the history of Anime directly drawing on French literature/history.
I enjoyed it a great deal, all the voice actors were great, it shared a lot of common voice actors with the dub of Code Geass.
I like that it starts with when Albert and The Count meet. I feel that is ideally how modern versions of the story should start, all three Hollywood films I've seen spend half the movie on the origin story. Which in a two hour movies leaves little time for what we actually came to see.
I feel a serialized format is best for adapting something like The Count of Monte-Cristo, it was a serialized format originally, but people forget that.
It does follow the common rout of adaptations making him save Mondeago for last.
The biggest problems I have all come down to Eugenie Danglars. I enjoy this take on her character in many ways, but it takes away her being a Lesbian in favor of making her and Albert the romantic endgame.
Her Lesbian affair is frequently dropped from adaptations partly because of it being censored from the earliest translations, and partly for the same reason it was censored. I can't even decide if including Eugenie but changing her sexuality is worse then most adaptations that don't even include her.
In addition to the issue hurting the potential LGBT representation. I also consider it interesting how in the original novel the Junior Lead doesn't wind up with either of his love interests.
Eugenie's Lesbian history is possibly homaged by the fact that she at times has somewhat of a Bifauxnen look. I don't think the writers were ignorant of it, because the versions that censor that tend to also censor the opium sequence, which is referenced in a sense in this Anime.
It disappoints me because I felt it lent itself to an Anime trope quite well, the Yuri or GL genre. But I guess they felt Eugenie's seeming coldness to Albert lent itself to another romantic Anime trope, which I'd probably screw up the name of. Perhaps it didn't seem like a good Yuri story to them because of Eugenie being younger even though she would have to be the Seme.
The loss of a Lesbian character is perhaps counter acted by the fact that Franz is clearly in love with Albert. And also Peppo being some kind of either Trans or Intersex person.
But another problem with what ultimately happens to Eugenie is her becoming ultimately a Damsel in Distress. And experiencing something very disturbingly similar to a Rape.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)