It was actually a movie about that old Chinese story of the orphan of Zhao, when some evil insane guy kills all of the family of Zhao except one baby survives and that baby grows up and kills that evil guy. Typical good vs. evil story.
Except that the movie made it even simpler and unrealistic. Instead of the orphan hating the evil guy, he grows to view him as a father figure and still ends up killing him just to resolve the plot =/.
Don't you just hate it when a movie scraps a perfectly good story for some flashy special effects and a chance for celebs to show themselves? Well, if you don't, you should.
Like the Twilight Saga movies. I've personally never read the Twilight books, but I heard they were really good. Over the summer, I did watch Eclipse and it was the worst movie ever: the only good part was when Jacob says to Edward "I'm obviously hotter than you." which, I admit, cracked me up. But other than that it was a disastrous excuse of a movie.
Oh and what about The Golden Compass? It actually had something resembling a plot, but in the end the movie ends on a cliffhanger when Lyra mentions a "war" and then.....the credits roll.
-.- Yeah not the best ending you'll ever see.
Harry Potter was among the better books-turned-movies. The first, second and third ones were all very enjoyable, but in the fourth one (Goblet of Fire, for the noobs who don't know) Dobby the epic house-elf doesn't even get mentioned. He even gives Harry the Gillyweed for the Second Task! There were more inaccuracies, and from there, the franchise went on a nosedive that only revived itself in Deathly Hallows Part 1, and even then they add random crap that wasn't even in the book (like Harry and Hermione dancing, for example).
My opinion concerning books-turned-movies are: the more you stick to the plot, the better. But sadly the Hollywood guys don't agree and scrap excellent stories that are bound to captivate audiences into just a random husk of a plot plus some 54th-generation special effects.
The rot has even got into TV shows. Like, for instance, Global TV's Survivor. I started watching Survivor in season 19: Samoa, where Russell Hantz just bossed the entire game and should have won over that dumb blonde Natalie. I thought it was pretty good, but when I went on YouTube to watch some old season 4 episodes, I was shocked to see how more realistic they were. The old Survivor was about, well, survival plus some awesome strategy and blindsides. The modern Survivor is just about strategy and blindsides. Russell is just a prime example of this. You never see him chopping wood and providing for his tribe, but you always see him strategizing with everyone and trying to further his own game.
Don't get me wrong, TV's not entirely fake. There are just some fine specimens of shows out there. On Global TV there was this epicly amazing show called 24, with all the action happening in one day and even a clock to show the exact time. But 24 got cancelled after its 8th season, and I can't really think of a replacement for it.
So basically this is why TV is falling and the computer is rising. The TV shows are all just some flashy special effects and no storyline at all. They aren't real. Computers, meanwhile, allow you to create something real, so that's why they're on the rise. So soon all TV will be good for is watching the World Cup once every four years and some other sports games.
Or playing video games =D.
No comments:
Post a Comment