The Utter Agony of Terrible Adaptations and how The Last of Us got it right

[AmazementComics]

None of us are strangers to bad adaptations of some of our favorite stories (in film or television, looking at you Dragon Ball Evolution). A lot of us have this knee jerk reaction of saying that an adaptation is terrible because it didn’t follow the book, video game, or show it’s based off of. Which is really short hand for something deeper. It’s essentially saying that it doesn’t understand what made the story special in the first place and certainly doesn’t offer anything better. Seeing a story you love recreated in another medium faithfully is very important because it means you get share something you love with someone else who may not get exposed to it otherwise. Case in point, I just got done watching The Last of Us. Having never played the games myself, I have to say I was thoroughly impressed with the TV show. I just feel like it elevated the inclusive humanity and survival intuition to a global audience from the relationship between the characters of smuggler Joel and orphaned teenage girl Ellie born immune to a hypothetical fungal plague across post apocalyptic Boston and most infected living landscapes in the United States. And the score was phenomenal.

So what are some story adaptations that you’re fond of? Or are there any that you absolutely hate?

[cherrystark]

I have mixed feelings about this. I think first and foremost, the best adaptations have a story that can naturally be grown and developed. I doubt that the original writer of Shrek ever intended the book to become a four-movie series, but the book had the potential for adaptation. A lot of modern adaptations for stuff, it seems like the source material didn't have room to expand into a TV show or movie, so the writers are forced to invent a new storyline.

For me, the best adaptations are ones where the writers truly understand the different layers of the story. For example, a lot of modern romances try to pattern their stories off Pride and Prejudice, but very few capture the themes of the original work. *My favorite version is a campy, Christian-inspired version that highlights true-to-canon versions of the original characters and nails how women interact with each other in a marriage-first culture. It's terrible but I love it.

I also really enjoy reading adaptations of fairytales with some of my favorites being Beauty and the Beast, Snow White, and Cinderella. The best ones are reimaginings. They are original stories that are loosely patterned off the original material (not Disney.) The worst ones are worse than fan fiction, IMO. Stockholm Syndrome? check. Abuse? check. It's all there.

I had a thought about how I wanted to end my reply but I forgot it. The main idea is that a GOOD adaptation, you can watch it and enjoy it without extra thought. A bad adaptation will almost always make you go "what the heck is this?" *Looking at you Avatar the Last Airbender!

[NickRowler]

A good film/show does not necessarily mean a good adaption.

I read several of the books for Bad Guys before watching the film. And the film definitely takes a lot of creative liberties, with the only similarities between the two are the character's names. A lot of the themes and story plots are completely gutted so that someone can do their Ocean's 11 theme film. If it was just a stand alone movie, I guess it would be OK but compared to the book, it is disappointing why they would use the IP while not using the story.

I think the worst adaptation is Mars Needs Moms. The book it is based on is very cute and charming. Plus the illustrations are very fun and would have worked perfectly for an animated film.

But nope, they changed the whole story and added their hideous characters. They removed every ounce of charm or creativity from the book. It's sort of depressing to think about it.

[HGohwell]

I think 2 bad recent-ish adaptions really stick out to me because they seem to miss everything that made the original good: The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy and Artemis Fowl. At the very least Hitchhikers Guide could be attributed to author death, modern comedy trend and Americanisation of a vey dry British sense of humour being half the jokes they kept from the original didn't land because they lose their context or missed the point or resorted to cringe and slapstick humour (as was popular at the time). Artemis Fowl on the other hand, was especially painful to me as this one of the books that got me reading as a kid, didn't seem to have any faith in the concept, so watered down what made it unique meaning it didn't stand out from everything else out there and didn't appeal to nostalgia fuelled fans like me.

On the other end of the spectrum, for all the Death Note movie is a terrible adaptaion/reimagining, if they hadn't tried to convince us that they were the same character as the manga and instead just said "got bored and dropped the Death Note in a new place, new characters, new story," it could have been a decent installment in the franchise. And Live Die Repeat Edge of Tomorrow is about as good a Hollywood light novel adaptation as you're ever going to see.

I maintain the problem with big budget live action adaptions, especailly of anime/manga is trying to change too much from the source, or not being willing to give it the special effects budget it needs. A popular story is popular for a reason, trying to change it because you know better usually leads to a bad product. And choosing to adapt things you don't have the budget for is also a terrible idea.

[powerplantanimations]

The thing about Last of Us is that it was a movie to begin with lmao. In fact, you can sum up a lot of Naughty Dog games this way. They sorta had the groundwork laid down for them which is why I'm annoyed whenever Playstation decides to make adaptions of their "cinematic video games".

Like okay... it's bad enough they hold the industry back by trying to make a medium another medium (film), it's ANOTHER thing to be like "Btw we're making a TV Show/Movie out of this". It's like... What's the point of making it into a video game then?

Isn't what makes those games feel special is that they're... I dunno... playable films? I remember Sony asking Seth Rogen to write for the Uncharted movie and he outright said "... But that'd be missing the point of the games....".

Also it's going to be real funny seeing them adapt Part II. I wasn't a fan of the story direction there, but the thing I liked was what a lot of people seemed to hate... and that was Joel's death. Someone said it best where they're like "If they change it, then that means they're AWARE that Part 2 has some problems... if they don't... they run the risk of having the general audience realizing how unremarkable the story is without their selling point (Pedro as Joel)."

As for adaptions, I'm more of a fan of when creators adapt certain concepts as metaphors or whatever. Iron Man 3 was one of the coolest adaptions I've ever seen in my entire life and I'm dying on that hill lmao. Same with Guardians Vol. 3. Loved what they did to Adam and how he's supposed to be like his comic counterpart, but the High Evolutionary let him out too early... but in his MOM'S eyes he's essentially his 616 Variant.

The Iron Man 3 thing with the Mandarin was so cool that I actually got annoyed that people wanted a more concrete "comic accurate version" when THE ENTIRE POINT WAS THAT HE WAS THIS BOOGEYMAN. Trevor Slattery represented Tony's hedonistic-addiction life-style while Killian represented Tony's playboy attitude/obsession. The Mandarin was clear-cut propaganda to make people afraid of communism. Killian manipulated the media to make him Tony's worst nightmare by screwing with his fears through Afghanistan/Iraq imagery which was prevalent at the time.

Spider-Man: No Way Home is probably the most accurate adaption I've seen what with it exploring what Ditko intended before leaving the company. The Green Goblin was even some random stranger like how Steve wanted it to be.

[AmazementComics]

I had a thought about how I wanted to end my reply but I forgot it. The main idea is that a GOOD adaptation, you can watch it and enjoy it without extra thought. A bad adaptation will almost always make you go "what the heck is this?" *Looking at you Avatar the Last Airbender!

You know what’s funny? I watched The Last Airbender on Sunday! And well… it definitely pales in comparison to the animated series. From the casting to the name changes. Reminds me of a two hour rant video I watched dissecting the movie. Rough buddy…

The thing about Last of Us is that it was a movie to begin with lmao. In fact, you can sum up a lot of Naughty Dog games this way. They sorta had the groundwork laid down for them which is why I'm annoyed whenever Playstation decides to make adaptions of their "cinematic video games".

Like okay... it's bad enough they hold the industry back by trying to make a medium another medium (film), it's ANOTHER thing to be like "Btw we're making a TV Show/Movie out of this". It's like... What's the point of making it into a video game then?

Interesting. I did not know it was based off of a movie. I think I remember watching the game cutscenes for the game and saw the TV series soon after.

[BlairFujin]

No, last of us game wasn't based off a movie, but the thing people liked about it was basically a movie, you just have to get through some very safe and uninspired 3rd person shooting and stealth around zombies to get to that movie. Modern Naughty Dog in general gives off a vibe that they'd rather be making movies/tv shows but are stuck making video games.

[cherrystark]

You know what’s funny? I watched The Last Airbender on Sunday! And well… it definitely pales in comparison to the animated series. From the casting to the name changes. Reminds me of a two hour rant video I watched dissecting the movie. Rough buddy…

Yeah, the movie was terrible. My friend made us sit through like 2 seasons of the cartoon before we watched the movie and we all left the theatre confused as heck. All bad adaptations pretty much warrant the same reaction as I had to Avatar.

[powerplantanimations]

What Animefanka said. I honestly thought they did storytelling better during the Jak and Daxter days. Video game stories are fun when you're able to tell a story only that medium can tell. You wouldn't miss out on anything with the Last of Us by watching the cutscenes since they did the bare minimum of the Ludo dissonance stuff.

@Animefanka I dislike being harsh on Druckmann... he seems like a nice guy... but I do hate his "holier than thou" attitude. He once said "We don't use the word 'fun'"". LIKE SON. I am paying $70 to play your disc on a $500 GAME SYSTEM. That word better be drilled in your vocab.

The fact that small budget games got his messages across better like No More Heroes and Hotline Miami bug me even more.

[BlairFujin]

Well... as someone who's pretty into Pathologic (but who also have yet to finish either 1 or 2 because of how stress inducing those games are 'xD) I prefer word "engaging" over "fun", because there are some games that I'd never call fun but are still very much worth experiencing. But I'm also someone who prefers interesting games over well-made ones.

My issue with current Naughty Dog is how easily you can remove gameplay part of them and not loose a thing (for someone like me who doesn't like shooters - guns are for cowards, let me slash my enemies 'xD, even improve them). When it comes to storytelling in games I prefer when it actually utilises video games as a medium, like in Pathologic or Nier. Which is also why I don't really vibe with kinetic visual novels... if there's no interactivity, why even make your story as a visual novel? Why not release it as an illustrated book or an audiobook (in case of Higurashi, because seriously... the og sprites in that game were ugly 'xD)

[AmazementComics]

Bumping this thread. Let’s continue the conversation.