03-26-2017, 10:59 PM | #21 | |
Megan Fox = April
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Tokio, Italy
Posts: 9,999
|
Movie and show adaptations of books are usually inferior to the books and no Cybercubed's crazy theory is incorrect. Movies are just easier to consume since they're a passive while books are more active. But a book can tell you so much more in about a situation or characters in general and that's hard to portray in film. That's not to say that film doesn't have it's advantages but in general books tend to be better with the exceptions that arise with anything of course.
Jurassic Park is one of those that in the fandom is hotly debated, the book is amazing but so is the film but neither is technically superior as they feel as different stories. The book is far more depressing while the movie has that Spielberg magic that makes it timeless and makes your imagination go wild. I personally prefer the movie but I understand why the book is considered superior since it's just deeper but it's just a grimmer tale and I prefer the "magical" take the movie has on it. The terms reboot and remake are used interchangably nowadays but they're quite different, a reboot is a new take on a story like say the latest Kong: Skull Island while a remake is taking the original story and making a new movie off it like Peter Jackson's King Kong. Reboots are easier to separate from the original while remakes usually fail since they're always compared to the original. Quote:
The only thing bad about the original is it definitely takes place in the 80s and it's also a bit slow by today's standard but other than that the story of this kid becoming someone is just classic and basically all future plots that deal with this rip off this movie, it really is a classic. I don't really remember the sequels very well besides the basic plots, the second one is a bit weird since they go to Japan and it's odd but cool they took the chances to do something else and the third film is what you would've expected Karate Kid 2 was going to be with basically the same plot but the stakes being larger. I almost feel like normally movies go the route of repeating the story before going into new territory for the third film and KK did it differently. The Next Karate Kid is like a new take on the first film but with a less interesting character, it's definitely the weakest of the four original films. The cartoon reeks of bad 80s cartoons and has nothing to do with the movies besides the character names and relationships but it has to do with magic and whatnot. I expected not to like the Jackie Chan version even if I love Jackie but I was surprised by how much I enjoyed it. It's a decent entry and deserves to be called Karate Kid which were big shoes to fill but no way is it better than the original. I'd like to see a sequel though, it's been in the planning stages for years now but who knows as Jaden Smith is now an adult, it'd be weird. I really would've liked Jaden to meet Daniel from the original movies since this version isn't really a remake just a new take but it could easily be in continuity with the original films. King Kong 2005 is the one that is dreadfully boring and I love it but they stretched the story and it was way too long, it's a decent entry but no way it's better than the original. The lack of music and black and white really set the mood of the movie, the fact that it's only an hour long or so the movie goes by fast and you never get bored, I'd say King Kong 1933 is really a timeless movie that you don't have to appreciate it because it was "made for their time". |
|
03-26-2017, 11:02 PM | #22 | |
Overlord
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 41,023
|
If there is a good movie adaption of a book, I would never read the book. The problem is some movies are just plain terrible, but that's just the fault of that particular movie.
Quote:
I can appreciate the old movies for what they were, but they're just rather boring to watch. Too slow for my tastes too, but whatever, it was literally 1933 so you can't say much about some of the first movies ever made other than they were a timepiece. |
|
03-26-2017, 11:19 PM | #23 | ||
PerfectlyTunedFightEngine
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: The Upsidedown
Posts: 7,926
|
Fight Club
That movie is leaps and bounds better than the book.
__________________
------------------------------------------------------ Quote:
Quote:
|
||
03-26-2017, 11:20 PM | #24 |
Foot Elite
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,085
|
that's more reboot.
__________________
|
03-26-2017, 11:46 PM | #25 |
Yukipedia
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1,723
|
I'd say Ender's Game.
|
03-27-2017, 06:08 AM | #26 |
Like, stupid rich.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Rawkzone
Posts: 2,805
|
Depending on who you ask, the new Evil Dead can give the original a run for it's money.
The Fly. Dredd. Piranha 3D. |
03-27-2017, 08:03 PM | #27 | |||||||
Dub Professor
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Dub Side of the Moon
Posts: 3,442
|
Lot of good points in here
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Agreed on Civil War. I'm way more of a fan of the MCU than I am of most of the comics. I can't look at the comic book costumes anymore without grimacing and thinking that the movies are doing them better (Hawkeye, Thor, Falcon all come to mind, as well as Wolverine, although I know that's a different studio) Quote:
Quote:
Same, it was just too weird, and I also like Depp quite a bit usually. Also the songs weren't as great
__________________
|
|||||||
03-27-2017, 08:05 PM | #28 |
Foot Elite
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,054
|
The Wiz Live! was WAY BETTER than the the 1978 film. The more I watch the latter, the worse it gets. The former just looks a lot nicer and has a very sold cast.
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|