fine films

The first teaser poster for Cars 3 (June 16, 2017) has been revealed. (x)

John Lasseter told Entertainment Weekly: “Lightning McQueen, he’s awesome. We’ve got some great new characters, some great racing in it. It’s a very emotional story. It’s a little bit more akin to Cars 1, where you get into a deep emotion with him. It’s really a special story. It’s very emotional and his relationship with Doc Hudson, and his memory of Doc Hudson.”

The first teaser trailer premiered earlier this month.

Where were you when Lightning McQueen died?

Okay I really don’t want to start discourse over BBC Les Mis before it’s even out but I will because this is bugging me. 

Davies shitting all over the 2012 film over it not being an “accurate” adaption of Hugo’s work- specifically because it’s a musical adaptation, really rubs me the wrong way.

The 2012 film was not trying to be a faithful adaptation of the brick- it was supposed to be a faithful adaptation of the stage show. The thing about interpreting a book into another medium is that no matter how true to the original source material you are, things are going to be left out or interpreted differently. That’s why so many novels brought to screen lose the a book’s original message or tone. Film and television are visual mediums- even with narration you wouldn’t be able to leave in every detail of Hugo’s work, and you shouldn’t want to, because even if you somehow managed to do that, it doesn’t mean your adaptation would be successful because it would not translate well to the screen. 

Furthermore, successfully adapting someones work means something different to everybody. I guarantee you that myself reading the brick would have taken away something completely different than somebody else. I may believe the 2012 film was a successful adaptation because it included themes from the book that I connected to personally. Another person may have hated it for this exact reason- the themes and characters they connected to were left on the cutting room floor.

There’s a certain sense of elitism in Davies’ words. That because the film was adapted as a musical it’s somehow can’t be as emotionally impacting as one that’s adapted straight from the brick. Even if Davies is not a fan of musical theatre as genre, he could have recognised that the film included pivotal and emotionally important themes and plot points from the brick.

I’m just saying that you don’t have to like a medium to appreciate it as an art form and recognise it’s successes. 

And saying straight off the bat that you’re adaption is going to be so much more powerful than an adaptation of one of Broadway’s longest running musical is a tall claim to make- especially when you haven’t even started writing the script yet.