random item

Troperville

Tools

Find recent edits by troper:

back to: Main / InNameOnly

edit article | go to discussion page

16th May '13 2:46:18 PM StFan

Send StFan a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Changed line(s) 301 (click to see context) from:

to:

16th May '13 11:37:36 AM toonman

Send toonman a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Added line(s) 300 (click to see context) :

11th May '13 10:28:54 AM twingle93

Send twingle93 a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Changed line(s) 188,189 (click to see context) from:

to:

* The ''Franchise/ResidentEvil'' [[Film/ResidentEvil movies]] got the ''look'' of the games down for the most part. Too bad they threw out the plot, characterization, atmosphere, and everything else that makes the games so enjoyable. The movies should have been called "The [[GodModeSue Amazing Alice's]] [[WaifFu Kung-Fu Adventures]] in {{Zombie|Apocalypse}} [[Film/TheMatrix MatrixLand]]." It would have made much more sense as a title ''and'' pissed off far fewer ''Franchise/ResidentEvil'' fans. 
** Which is such a shame, as the first few minutes of the first film really capture the 'feel' of ''Franchise/ResidentEvil'', only to have it immediately thrown away to move out of the mansion and onto the technological underground bunker. 
*** The first film may have been originally intended as a prequel to the first game. Everything afterwards deviated more and more into live action ResidentEvil FanFiction staring Alice, the director's MarySue. Even when characters from the games were introduced into the films, they were either foil for Alice (Wesker) or were reduced to becoming Alice's sidekicks (Chris Redfield, Claire Redfield, Leon S. Kennedy).

11th May '13 10:20:50 AM twingle93

Send twingle93 a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Added line(s) 180 (click to see context) :

11th May '13 10:13:07 AM twingle93

Send twingle93 a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Changed line(s) 150 (click to see context) from:

* ''Film/IAmLegend'': The only thing the film and the book have in common is a disease that turns people into monsters. And even then they didn't get it quite right: the infected in the book are traditional vampires (which the book painstakingly comes up with scientific explanations for all their weaknesses: sunlight, aversion to mirrors and holy objects, garlic, staking) who are slow and stupid like zombies, while in the movie they are just hairless, pale cannibals like the monsters from TheDescent. In the new movie it's a virus, but in the old book, it was a type of bacteria. Also, a Caucasian-to-minority RaceLift for the main character, Robert Neville, who is nothing like the Neville of the book. Neville's unique immunity is just something that he was born with, and there are plenty of others who are also immune. The setting was a suburb in a small town, while the movie takes places in a desolated New York city. There is no Ben Cortman character (unless you count the nameless infected leader, and even then he shares nothing in common with the neighbor-turned vampire character from the book). There is no separate faction of intelligent, civilized vampires (maybe because they thought viewing audiences would be dense to understand that concept). The woman that Neville meets does not [[spoiler: turn out to be one of the intelligent vampires and betray him]]. Of course, ''I Am Legend'' isn't TheFilmOfTheBook so much as a remake of ''Film/TheOmegaMan'', which is ''itself'' an InNameOnly adaptation of the book ''Literature/IAmLegend''... Except for the name, of course, and the film gives the meaning of the title an entirely different meaning. Robert Neville is a legend because he developed a cure, while in the book Neville [[spoiler: is a legend because in a world inhabited entirely by vampires, the one normal human that hunts them is the monster. He walks in the daylight, he stalks them while they are sleeping and impales them to leave bloodless corpses behind. It makes him the "human Dracula" of this world]]. The original ending would've given it some connection with the book it was apparently based on, but that was changed too.

to:

* ''Film/IAmLegend'': The only thing the film and the book have in common is a disease that turns people into monsters. And even then they didn't get it quite right: the infected in the book are traditional vampires (which the book painstakingly comes up with scientific explanations for all their weaknesses: sunlight, aversion to mirrors and holy objects, garlic, staking) who are slow and stupid like zombies, while in the movie they are just hairless, pale cannibals like the monsters from TheDescent. In the new movie it's a virus that was developed as a cure for cancer, but in the old book, it was a type of bacteria carried by dust storms. Also, a Caucasian-to-minority RaceLift for the main character, Robert Neville, who is nothing like the Neville of the book. While Neville loses his daughter and wife in the film, it's not because of them being infected. Neville's unique immunity is just something that he was born with, and there are plenty of others who are also immune. The setting was a suburb in a small town, while the movie takes places in a desolated New York city. There is no Ben Cortman character (unless you count the nameless infected leader, and even then he shares nothing in common with the Determinator neighbor-turned vampire character from the book). There are no scenes of the infected harassing Neville at home. There is no separate faction of intelligent, civilized vampires (maybe because they thought viewing audiences would be too dense to understand that concept). The woman that Neville meets does not [[spoiler: turn out to be one of the intelligent vampires and betrays him]]. Of course, ''I Am Legend'' isn't TheFilmOfTheBook so much as a remake of ''Film/TheOmegaMan'', which is ''itself'' an InNameOnly adaptation of the book ''Literature/IAmLegend''... Except for the name, of course, and the film gives the meaning of the title an entirely different meaning. Robert Neville is a legend because he developed a cure, while in the book Neville [[spoiler: is a legend because in a world inhabited entirely by vampires, the one normal human that hunts them is the monster. He walks in the daylight, he stalks them while they are sleeping and impales them to leave bloodless corpses behind. It makes him the "human Dracula" of this world]]. The original ending would've given it some connection with the book it was apparently based on, but that was changed too.

11th May '13 10:07:05 AM twingle93

Send twingle93 a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Changed line(s) 150 (click to see context) from:

* ''Film/IAmLegend'': The original ending would've given it some connection with the book it was apparently based on, but that was changed too... now the only thing they have in common is a disease that turns people into monsters. And even then they didn't get it quite right: the infected in the book are traditional vampires (which the book painstakingly comes up with scientific explanations for all their weaknesses: sunlight, aversion to mirrors and holy objects, garlic, staking) who are slow and stupid like zombies, while in the movie they are just hairless, pale cannibals like the monsters from TheDescent. In the new movie it's a virus, but in the old book, it was a type of bacteria. Also, a Caucasian-to-minority RaceLift for the main character, Robert Neville, who is nothing like the Neville of the book. Neville's unique immunity is just something that he was born with, and there are plenty of others who are also immune. The setting was a suburb in a small town, while the movie takes places in a desolated New York city. There is no Ben Cortman character (unless you count the nameless infected leader, and even then he shares nothing in common with the neighbor-turned vampire character from the book). There is no separate faction of intelligent, civilized vampires (maybe because they thought viewing audiences would be dense to understand that concept). The woman that Neville meets does not [[spoiler: turn out to be one of the intelligent vampires and betray him]]. Of course, ''I Am Legend'' isn't TheFilmOfTheBook so much as a remake of ''Film/TheOmegaMan'', which is ''itself'' an InNameOnly adaptation of the book ''Literature/IAmLegend''... Except for the name, of course, and the film gives the meaning of the title an entirely different meaning. Robert Neville is a legend because he developed a cure, while in the book Neville [[spoiler: is a legend because in a world inhabited entirely by vampires, the one normal human that hunts them is the monster. He walks in the daylight, he stalks them while they are sleeping and impales them to leave bloodless corpses behind. It makes him the "human Dracula" of this world]].

to:

11th May '13 10:04:06 AM twingle93

Send twingle93 a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Changed line(s) 150 (click to see context) from:

to:

9th May '13 5:46:53 PM TheAmazingBlachman

Send TheAmazingBlachman a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Changed line(s) 188 (click to see context) from:

to:

7th May '13 8:18:24 PM Prfnoff

Send Prfnoff a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Moving to What Could Have Been.Film

Deleted line(s) 253 (click to see context) :

* According to [[http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/movie-talk-twilight-that-almost-was.html this article]], the film adaptation of ''Literature/{{Twilight}}'' [[WhatCouldHaveBeen would have become this]]. ExecutiveMeddling at Paramount was originally planning to turn ''Twilight'' into a far more action-heavy movie -- think ''Film/{{Underworld}}'' [[RecycledInSpace in high school]] -- in order to bring in more male viewers. Bella was made into a far more active character (she was written as a track star) who fought back against the vampires, and gets turned into one herself in the first movie. AnyoneCanDie was in full effect, with Bella's dad dying by the end of the movie. A Korean FBI vampire hunter was introduced [[UnfortunateImplications as an antagonist]], and one scene had vampires picking off members of a SWAT team sent into a forest after them. Creator/StephenieMeyer decided to pull an ExecutiveVeto on that idea and, instead, sold the rights to Summit, which made an adaptation that was far more faithful to the novel.

7th May '13 8:34:24 AM Saurubiker

Send Saurubiker a PM notification explaining the badness of natter: natter-fy

Changed line(s) 369 (click to see context) from:

to:

This list shows the last 10 events of 19. Show all.

new edits

TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy