Lot's of great films, adaptations, prequels, sequels and so on have been detrimentally ruined despite having good premises or source material to work with. I'm going to list some examples and you can add your own.
Spoiler for The Dark Knight:
Where they fucked up
So the Dark Knight opened with an intensely likable villains doing some pretty epic shit. Heath Ledger did so well that he made Christian Bale absolutely tolerable. And of course, the Joker as a character demands respect. And so does Two-Face. One of these villains was handled right, the other was handled right in the beginning then had his entire story-arc jammed into a contrived kidnapping plot at the very end. Worse yet they turned him into the Joker's puppet, despite the fact that the Joker caused him all his anguish to begin with. Rather than allow Two-Face to evolve into a calculating and menacing villain, they just had him flip out and try to kill Gordon's Family, removing all the epic potential he could have had as the main villain in the third installment.
What they should have done instead
Let Harvey Dent's story finish with that bar scene where he flips the coin for the first time, then pick back up again in the third batman. Bane and the League of Shadows could have had their place, but meanwhile Marconi or whatever worthless mob boss is being used could have been replaced by the intriguing and charismatic Two-Face. This would have given the character a proper handling and would have saved the Dark Knight's Ending.
Spoiler for Star Wars Revenge of the Sith:
Where they fucked up
Obviously a few conversations with a creepy old pedophile and a bad dream are more than enough to push someone over the edge so they'll slaughter an entire group of children without hesitation. After all he needs to save Padme, so murdering children makes perfect sense. Nothing contrived about that. There's also nothing wrong with killing Mace Windu like a bitch despite the fact that he's probably the most popular jedi of all time.
What they should have done instead
They just didn't have the balls not to make Anakin's turn to the dark side contrived. And why? Because it takes two to tango, and that would have meant staining Obi-won's flawless personality. News Flash, Revenge of the Sith was meant to be a tragedy, a failure on the part of Obi-won and Yoda, setting Luke up to redeem their mistakes, not just his fathers. They should have gone with the Self-fulfilling prophecy angle. First of all let Padme give birth to the twins, second of all make Obi-won so worried about Anakin he decides to hide the kids and Padme. Suddenly Anakin would actually have a believable reason to hate the fucking jedi, because they would have taken his family away before he even did anything. Obi-won needed to make a mistake, you couldn't shift the whole tragedy onto Anakin's shoulders alone, that's not how it works. Mace Windu could have been acting as the voice of reason, or perhaps even helping Obi-won while Yoda acted as the voice of reason. Either way, Mace should have been there at the end, and his death scene should have been tied to the epic Anagnorisis.
Spoiler for Harry Potter 7 part 2:
Where they fucked up
Much like Star Wars, too much got centered on the allegory and the complexity of human relationships (it takes two to tango) was forgotten. Ron, and everything he stood for and desired, was brushed under the rug so Harry Potter could be Jesus without any personal story getting in the way. Let's recall Ron was dealing with two things, being hopelessly in love with Hermione and feeling like he was living in Harry's shadow. This all got resolved with some bullshit lake scene where Ron magically just forgives Harry for being way cooler than him, allowing the climax to be free of any meaning or emotional investment whatsoever. Something these people need to keep in mind is that the relationships are the story. The story is a metaphor for the personal growth people go through. That's how we get emotionally invested, and that's what makes the difference between a shitty dime-a-dozen Marvel adaption and films like Braveheart, The Matrix, Fifth Element and the original Star Wars.
What they should have done instead
One of the biggest questions that kept you reading the books/watching the movies was this: Why did Dumbledore trust Snape? This was answered beautifully, only so Snape could be killed like a bitch directly afterwards. Here again we see a critical plot point resolved the quick and easy way rather than utilized for the climax. If only you kept him alive. I love Neville but come on, we all know Snape should have cut off that snake's head, or at least survive long enough he could sacrifice himself at the climax. And Ron needed to save Hermione, proving his love for her and transcending Harry's shadow. This also needed to happen at the climax, and it would have been especially satisfying if Hermione thought Harry was the one saving her, only to find out it was really Ron. Bam, romance not contrived, time to live happily ever after. Because this element was missing, I can only assume Hermione was screwing around behind Ron's back like a total whore in the epilogue.
Spoiler for Spider Man 3:
Where they fucked up
This one's obvious. Sandman is a stupid villain, and should have been left out. Venom also needed a bigger role. I don't even need to take any time explaining why this movie was awful, we all know it was.
The main story being built up was between Hobgoblin and Spider Man and that needed to take center stage, not just their battles as superheroes but as friends attempting to find reconciliation that seems all but out of reach. Then, when it seems like reconciliation was about to be reached, then you throw Venom in to fuck shit up and let it spiral into a climatic battle.
07-05-2012, 06:54 PM
mdspencer68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omnis Dei
Lot's of great films, adaptations, prequels, sequels and so on have been detrimentally ruined despite having good premises or source material to work with. I'm going to list some examples and you can add your own.
Spoiler for The Dark Knight:
Where they fucked up
So the Dark Knight opened with an intensely likable villains doing some pretty epic shit. Heath Ledger did so well that he made Christian Bale absolutely tolerable. And of course, the Joker as a character demands respect. And so does Two-Face. One of these villains was handled right, the other was handled right in the beginning then had his entire story-arc jammed into a contrived kidnapping plot at the very end. Worse yet they turned him into the Joker's puppet, despite the fact that the Joker caused him all his anguish to begin with. Rather than allow Two-Face to evolve into a calculating and menacing villain, they just had him flip out and try to kill Gordon's Family, removing all the epic potential he could have had as the main villain in the third installment.
What they should have done instead
Let Harvey Dent's story finish with that bar scene where he flips the coin for the first time, then pick back up again in the third batman. Bane and the League of Shadows could have had their place, but meanwhile Marconi or whatever worthless mob boss is being used could have been replaced by the intriguing and charismatic Two-Face. This would have given the character a proper handling and would have saved the Dark Knight's Ending.
I think the reason why they took this road was to play on the Joker's assumption that even the most honest amongst us can be corrupted.
Spoiler for Star Wars Revenge of the Sith:
Where they fucked up
Obviously a few conversations with a creepy old pedophile and a bad dream are more than enough to push someone over the edge so they'll slaughter an entire group of children without hesitation. After all he needs to save Padme, so murdering children makes perfect sense. Nothing contrived about that. There's also nothing wrong with killing Mace Windu like a bitch despite the fact that he's probably the most popular jedi of all time.
What they should have done instead
They just didn't have the balls not to make Anakin's turn to the dark side contrived. And why? Because it takes two to tango, and that would have meant staining Obi-won's flawless personality. News Flash, Revenge of the Sith was meant to be a tragedy, a failure on the part of Obi-won and Yoda, setting Luke up to redeem their mistakes, not just his fathers. They should have gone with the Self-fulfilling prophecy angle. First of all let Padme give birth to the twins, second of all make Obi-won so worried about Anakin he decides to hide the kids and Padme. Suddenly Anakin would actually have a believable reason to hate the fucking jedi, because they would have taken his family away before he even did anything. Obi-won needed to make a mistake, you couldn't shift the whole tragedy onto Anakin's shoulders alone, that's not how it works. Mace Windu could have been acting as the voice of reason, or perhaps even helping Obi-won while Yoda acted as the voice of reason. Either way, Mace should have been there at the end, and his death scene should have been tied to the epic Anagnorisis.
The only thing I can say about this is movie is that Hayden Christensen's wooden acting killed it for me.:roll:
Spoiler for Harry Potter 7 part 2:
Where they fucked up
Much like Star Wars, too much got centered on the allegory and the complexity of human relationships (it takes two to tango) was forgotten. Ron, and everything he stood for and desired, was brushed under the rug so Harry Potter could be Jesus without any personal story getting in the way. Let's recall Ron was dealing with two things, being hopelessly in love with Hermione and feeling like he was living in Harry's shadow. This all got resolved with some bullshit lake scene where Ron magically just forgives Harry for being way cooler than him, allowing the climax to be free of any meaning or emotional investment whatsoever. Something these people need to keep in mind is that the relationships are the story. The story is a metaphor for the personal growth people go through. That's how we get emotionally invested, and that's what makes the difference between a shitty dime-a-dozen Marvel adaption and films like Braveheart, The Matrix, Fifth Element and the original Star Wars.
What they should have done instead
One of the biggest questions that kept you reading the books/watching the movies was this: Why did Dumbledore trust Snape? This was answered beautifully, only so Snape could be killed like a bitch directly afterwards. Here again we see a critical plot point resolved the quick and easy way rather than utilized for the climax. If only you kept him alive. I love Neville but come on, we all know Snape should have cut off that snake's head, or at least survive long enough he could sacrifice himself at the climax. And Ron needed to save Hermione, proving his love for her and transcending Harry's shadow. This also needed to happen at the climax, and it would have been especially satisfying if Hermione thought Harry was the one saving her, only to find out it was really Ron. Bam, romance not contrived, time to live happily ever after. Because this element was missing, I can only assume Hermione was screwing around behind Ron's back like a total whore in the epilogue.
Never watched any of these movies, so I can't comment on it.
Spoiler for Spider Man 3:
Where they fucked up
This one's obvious. Sandman is a stupid villain, and should have been left out. Venom also needed a bigger role. I don't even need to take any time explaining why this movie was awful, we all know it was.
The main story being built up was between Hobgoblin and Spider Man and that needed to take center stage, not just their battles as superheroes but as friends attempting to find reconciliation that seems all but out of reach. Then, when it seems like reconciliation was about to be reached, then you throw Venom in to fuck shit up and let it spiral into a climatic battle.
I hate it when producers feel that they need to have two super villains. It usually causes the movie to lose it's focus.
Sorry for the weird format. I Can't seem to get it right:)
07-05-2012, 07:31 PM
Supernova
How about The Matrix Revolution?
07-05-2012, 09:11 PM
Original Poster
As Grant Morrison would say, they should have just kept copying him. The Matrix was actually based on The Invisibles (though the Wachowski Brothers won't admit it, if you read the comic the similarities are well beyond coincidence.) The Matrix Sequels parted from the source material in all the wrong ways, and that is why they sucked.
Another story that did this is Full Metal Alchemist. Because the manga was taking too long to finish they decided to just ignore it after a while. When the manga was nearly finished they came up with Brotherhood to more closely follow the story. Brotherhood also failed a bit in the beginning because of the way it summarized so much of the epic build up. The original is salvageable, all you have to do is watch the original Full Metal Alchemist until they introduce Dante, then throw away the rest or better yet burn them, and start watching Brotherhood. The first 15-20 episodes will be a little redundant but you'll understand why it was worth it to watch the original version of this part of the story. Then it'll get good. Then it'll get really good.
Honestly anything based on source material tends to fuck up every time they change anything. Game of Thrones is one of the few pieces that seems to improve with changes, albeit while losing some depth. But marvel and dc based films tend to fuck up whenever they don't follow the story arc of the comics (see X-Men, Green Lantern etc, etc, etc...) I believe Star Wars wouldn't have fucked up if it was based on a book series authored by a single person. As it was the original story was a success due to having so little to do with George Lucas, writing and directing wise. The prequels failed for the opposite reason. Harry Potter is an exception, JK Rowling just proved sort of shitty at the end. But even so it probably would've been even worse had they derided from the book's plot.
