this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2024
1925 points (98.0% liked)

memes

9334 readers
2613 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rekabis@lemmy.ca 67 points 6 months ago (6 children)

Virtually every single bad adaptation can be directly traced back to studio interference.

Movies like LoTR only happened because the studios thought it would be a colossal flop, and so left the directors and producers alone.

If you want great movies, the studios need to leave the producers and directors the hell alone.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 20 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Counterpoint: Game of Thrones. The studio would have been happy to give them a few more seasons to develop a better ending. It's the creators who gave up and phoned in the ending we got.

[–] Rodeo@lemmy.ca 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

George RR Martin is the creator of game of thrones, not the show runners.

Oh wait, the original example was lotr, which also was based on books lol. Nevermind me, carry on.

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

George RR Martin was a consultant on seasons that had not yet been written as books. He told the writers where he wanted the story in the books to go, and where to take the story in the show. I doubt it's true, but a lot of fans were speculating that he made the end deliberately bad (Arya kills the Night King, Denarys goes crazy, Cersei and Kingslayer reunite to be crushed by the collapsing Red Keep, Bran becomes king) because he wanted the show to be worse than his next two books. @

[–] Strobelt@lemmy.world 12 points 6 months ago (1 children)

My head Canon is that that was the actual ending he planned and because it flopped so hard the last books will never happen

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago

No man, that specific ending can be made to work. But you need good writers, several more seasons and good taste to do that. Martin gave DandD a finish line, but they had to figure the trail and make the run. They just suck at that so bad that it almost killed their entire careers, got them dropped from the job they had lined up and poisoned everything they touched for 5 years. Netflix just gave them the “3 body problem” adaptation. I'm sure it will be good because the thing is already written, and they are usually good at coloring between the lines. Just not good at coming up with new original or creative stuff.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 5 points 6 months ago

He said in interviews that he was pushing for 10 seasons, I don't think he intentionally fucked up, I think he did what he could with two showrunners that were tired of doing their job and couldn't accept that someone else would take the reins.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

LOTR was based on a trilogy that was finished looking before the movies were made. Starting a TV show and hoping the source material would be finished in time for the end was a, um, bold move.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 9 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Even ignoring that, Martin was helping them continue it without a book to base the story on and was pushing for 10 sessions, the show creators wanted to move on and start working on another project instead and we got what we got...

[–] wildcardology@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

And they promptly lost said projects.

[–] Strobelt@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago
[–] UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The only problem is that GoT didn't have any more source material, as Martin didn't finish the story (think he still hasn't?).

[–] frezik@midwest.social 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The creators were in constant touch with GRRM. They knew where he intends to go. The ending we got could be done better if things were fleshed out over a longer period of time.

[–] Volkditty@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You're assuming GRRM knows where he intends to go. Or more importantly, how he intends to get there.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 1 points 6 months ago

We know he has a specific destination in mind. It's well established that he had an outline for what was originally a trilogy. It's why the first book is heavier with hints of (for example) Jon's lineage than the others.

How to get there has clearly changed, and GRRM might not know how anymore.

[–] StThicket@reddthat.com 16 points 6 months ago

Also, low bugets makes the directors extra creative. They need to make the most of what they have. In my opinion, a well written plot trumps special effects every time.

[–] Son_of_dad@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago (1 children)

For all the bad you hear about studios though, there are plenty of stories of movies that were saved by the studio because the director was off the rails and had no idea what to do. Here's a list with a couple:

https://collider.com/10-movies-that-were-improved-by-studio-interference/#easy-rider-1969

[–] whhavinfun@sh.itjust.works 26 points 6 months ago

Most of these are a stretch. They didn't like psycho so they underfunded it. Hitchcock finances the movie, takes a pay cut along with the actors. Somehow this is positive interference....

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 10 points 6 months ago (4 children)

Writing is the only thing that matters. I point to "Everything Everywhere All at Once" and "Amsterdam". The latter of which had 4x the budget.

[–] crackajack@reddthat.com 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I kinda disagree with the writing being the ultimate decider on what makes a good story) movie. Directing and editing matters just as much, if not more so. Those two brings to life what is written on the page because sometimes it's hard to imagine what is described on the page.

[–] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 6 months ago

Good writing, directing and editing are all necessary, and are not on their own sufficient.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

Because a bad effect, actor, or shot can only ruin a moment. A bad script ruins the story.

[–] MrScottyTay@sh.itjust.works 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

I quite enjoyed amsterdam. It's not better than everything everywhere but it's still a good film

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 1 points 6 months ago

Well to be fair I had way too much weed beforehand but like. Ehhhhh. It felt like a circlejerk for random famous people. Also Taylor Swift cannot act.

[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com -1 points 6 months ago

Why not just read a book, then?

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago

LotR also is going to stand out from now on, because at the time it was made, CGI was ok, and getting to be good, but they didn't trust it for crowds yet. SW Ep. 1 came out at about the same time, and the CGI crowds don't hold up. LotR had PJ directing and he wanted to use as many real people and real sets as he could, so that when they had to use CGI it wouldn't be noticable. You can see the difference looking at The Hobbit movies.

[–] crackajack@reddthat.com 1 points 6 months ago

I can't remember who it was, but there was a producer credited for greenlighting several classic movies in the 1960s and 70s. We're lucky if a producer or executive is good at spotting what makes a good story and have dependable crew to make it.