Recent comments in /f/movies

One-Panic-8102 t1_je3oulb wrote

Pride and Prejudice (Keira Knightly Movie)- Pros: adapts the meandering book structure into a powerful and affective 3-act-movie structure which managed to connect with modern audiences, no easy feat!

Cons: has the feeling of a shlocky modern romance novel rather than the subtlety and humor of the original. WHY IS DARCY SO BORING AND MEAN? WHY IS ELIZABETH SO BORING? AUGHHHHHH

Pride and Prejudice (90s series): Pros: A more faithful adaptation technically and I’m fully rooting for this Elizabeth, who captures the wit and charm of the original.

Cons: again…why do you all make Darcy so darn boring?!?! There are places in the book where he reacts with clear emotion where these adaptations will have the actor just sit there like a space cadet. He is RESERVED not fully CHECKED OUT. PLEASE.

Emma (2020?): haven’t finished the book honestly but… Cons: just a little too much modern-feeling humor. A little cartoony at points.

Pros: the best adaptation of the tone, structure and subtlety of an Austen novel I’ve seen! The focus on the interpersonal relationships and the ways they evolve and interact with issues of marriage, class, wealth, plus all the annoying (funny) quotidian issues of fussy family and such- so good. Such a great adaptation of austen’s subjects and style.

Anne of Green Gables on Netflix: nooooooooooo

Bridge to Terabithia (90s): haven’t seen it in a while (I was a kid) but I remember being very disappointed. Very 90’s corny where the film could have been as beautiful, artistic and melancholy as the book. From what i remember they also completely gloss over the wealth and gender topics of the main characters in favor of Relatable 90’s Boy and Manic Pixie Dream Girl. Blegh. Wish they remade this one with a good director sometime.

Tuck Everlasting: damn good, maybe even almost better than the book? I liked how they aged Winnie to be older and added a little more of her romance, it made it feel like a more impactful growing-up story. Every actor breathes life into their roles, and Angus especially kills it.

3

amplifylight t1_je3nzlh wrote

You would find someone with the filmmaker prominence of Spielberg, the industry prominence of Katzenberg and Geffen and raise billions from banks. So team up Nolan with Bob Iger and say Charles King.

Even then you’ll probably just be successful enough to sell it off to a bigger studio, as happened with Dreamworks SKG.

The other thing to keep in mind is TV is as or more important than film these days.

A24 is the wrong comparison because it’s a speciality brand. Even when they make poppy movies it’s still aimed with a certain type of film audience in mind.

1

tigojones t1_je3nmjd wrote

Yes, yes it is. This is studio interference in a nutshell, plus some inexperience. Luckily, the TV show was significantly better, because he was able to maintain more control over it and make it (mostly) HIS show.

It's just too bad that he ended up a major jackass (was he always like this, but it was kept under wraps, or did his personality "evolve" into this over time. Does it even really matter?). His works make up a significant portion of my favourite shows and movies, and I will pretty much check out any show/film featuring any of the major cast members of Buffy/Angel/Firefly, just because of how much I enjoyed those shows.

6

Sks44 t1_je3n4gg wrote

I remember thinking the Leon/Mathilda relationship was odd. Then I saw an extended cut and it was flat out pedo creepy. Besson is a creepy groomer. It kind of ruined the movie for me. I can’t even watch the American edit.

1