Not per se. They aren't trying to tell an exact duplicate of the story told in FFXII. They're telling their own variation and interpretation of it. It's going to be different, and going to be limited in scope thanks to the format. But that doesn't mean it can't be enjoyable or entertaining. It's not like its meant to be taken in place of the original game, or as some sort of connection to it, in terms of continuity. It shouldn't stray too far from the source material, but it is going to stray to allow some room for the manga-ka's differing take of the story.
"Differing take" makes it sound like they have schizophrenia.
Mako said:
Dragonball Evolution is a sin against nature. No, if you're gonna take the franchise and run it through a meat processor, and make it so completely removed from the source material that it only vaguely resembles the franchise its derived from, you probably shouldn't bother touching it in the first place. See also the Super Mario Bros. movie, Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li, the Doom movie, and a shit load of other crap quality video game/anime movies.
I thought "Super Mario Bros," "Street Figher" (the one with Raul Julia) and "Mortal Kombat" were fun. Hell, I'd actually call "Mortal Kombat"
good. I liked it enough to buy it.
"MK: Annihilation" sucked, though, as did "Double Dragon."
I'm still waiting on that "Tetris" movie, though. That could be promising.
Mako said:
It didn't even try to be a fucking dime-novel or pulp magazine, either. It was shit in every sense. The humor was trash, the acting was trash, and the effects were dated and weak. I will agree it didn't take itself seriously at all. And that was the problem. It wasn't fun, it was painful. It was painfully obvious it was a cheaply made cash-in with no regard for the source material.
I think it
did have regard for the source material, and that was why they didn't take it serioiusly.
Besides, Emmy Rossum was cute as fuck in DE. And as far as it goes, being a good actor, there was nothing lacking in her effort, either -- which you can't really say about the rest of the cast.
Except maybe Chow Yun-Fat. He turned in a great performance as Chow Yun-Fat.
Mako said:
Again, if you're not even going to try, then don't bother touching shit that's not yours.
I'm sure they payed for the license.
Mako said:
Watchmen was one of the better film adaptions of comic books I've seen in awhile. Aside from some points it strays from the source material due to time, I'm not seeing why its bad. Its not superior, but it tries its best to capture the theme and storyline of its source.
If that was the best it could do to capture the atmosphere, it missed the mark horribly. For one thing, the production values were way too high. They should have given it a much grainier look and diminished lighting -- and, I don't know, made it look like the fucking 80s.
There's a number of ways they could have done a better job with that, but the most interesting way is one they obviously never considered. When I look at the comics' panels and imagine them in moving form, I'm like, "Hey, it's 80s production values." If they'd actually gone for that, it would have been clever and actually fit the setting way better.
Not to mention it would have indicated a more appropriate degree of nuance given to a work that, in its original form, was extremely nuanced.
In any event, a "Watchmen" adaptation never had a chance to be comparable to the original from the beginning. There's so much to the telling of "Watchmen," the comic, that relies on the very medium itself.
Really, this is a case where those who argue for the theory of medium specificity are correct: There's some things that one medium can do that another never could.
That said, I will repeat an offense I once remarked before -- the film of "V for Vendetta" was much better than its comic counterpart, and Alan Moore needs to watch it again if he still disagrees.
Mako said:
You raise a good point, but any good book or comic can achieve the same impact if its story and writing is strong enough to carry it. I'll remember a good book a lot more than a mediocre movie. Even if my senses are being stimulated more by said movie. In the end, its how much a story reaches you and burns itself into your mind, than just how much stimuli you get out the experience.
That's the thing -- effective use of the extra stimuli means you'll get more out of the experience, and it will burn itself into your mind better.
I loved XII.
