Dan Olson / Folding Ideas

Man, Dan and Lindsay Ellis really fucking hate CinemaSins, huh?

Edited by Larkmarn on Nov 1st 2018 at 2:11:49 PM

They're an easy target because of their content really

I mean, CS is the only one Lindsay explicitly calls out in her Beauty and the Beast video, and Dan brought it up even though it's at best tangentially related to this video.

IIRC, Lindsay said in her Q&A video that she sympathizes with Cinema Sins to some extent because she understood their need to churn out content as quickly as possible to please the algorithm. If anything, Cinema Sins deserve a bit a slack for being somewhat tongue-in-cheek/self-aware. Can't really say the same for all those ending-explains videos.

Edited by HottoKenai on Nov 2nd 2018 at 6:37:30 PM

Here a video that might explain why critics in particular dislike them. In particular, the first thing he address is the notion that they are tongue and cheek, as they often mix their real criticism into the videos as well as actually describing their videos as real criticism.

Personally, the reason I dislike their videos (as in, I don't find them funny) is the mix of actual nitpick and just being wrong about stuff. Absurd nitpicking can be funny, (and even cathartic, if you don't like the movie), but it only works if the nitpicks are somewhat accurate. They need to be based on reality. But much often CS is just plain wrong about stuff, nitpicking things that are literally explained moments later. And that could be funny as well, if the point was to have a character that is always wrong about criticism, but then that is ruined by so many of their points being actually somewhat legitimate. They don't go all the way in either direction and it is just unfunny as a result. It come across an overnitpicky reviewer who just happen to be wrong half of the time.

Another VLOG where Dan goes to watch a movie so bad he needs to share it. The new Robin Hood Film.

I saw Chris Stuckmann's review of it earlier. Holy crap, this movie sounds hilariously bad.

Part 3 is here!

It continues to be absolutely amazing how little awareness the writer of the books has. Like, part of me is still thinking that the obviousness is just as act since the abuse is so blindingly obvious. So many missed opportunities.

I love his assessment that 50 Shades' main character is Christian, coz he's the self-insert.

I really wonder what the series could've been like if Sam Taylor Johnson and Kelly Marcel were able to ontinue writing and directing. It's clear they were trying really damn hard to make something that could legitimately be considered good, but Erika Mitchell was hell bent on having her dumpster fire be presented on screen in its purest form.

Honestly, probably not that different. It's not like the first movie was a master piece. By Dan's admission, it massages some of the worst elements of the series away, but only so much.

At best you probably would've gotten something that's in Dan's word, Trashy fun, with maybe something approaching an arc for one of the characters.

It's definitely not a great movie, but even so, I'm impressed with what they were able to do. I've read the first book (it's a chore to get through) and I can attest that they had nothing to work with. I really hope Johnson and Marcell get more work. It's clear they have a lot of talent.

Well Marcell is one of the writers on Venom and Johnson is directing (and co-writing) A Million Little Pieces due next year.

"Awww it's not the Matchbox Twenty song :/"

"... never mind that this song is perfection"

The idea that Christian is the self-insert makes too much sense... and it's rather horrifying. Especially considering this (copy pasting some rare good Youtube comments):

Yes. Eeeeewwww

Elena and Ericka. The names even have similar sounds.

x6

At the same time, the first movie still wasn't the writer/director pair's vision either. It wasn't void of EL's influence and that's also the video that Dan discussed a 5 hour on set screaming matching staring James.

I think the "What if?" is more about "What would have happened to the series if James were not given the influence she wanted and Johnson and Marcell were allowed to adapt it as they needed.

That's true. Johnson and Marcell had to fight like hell for the changes that made it through, and Mitchell was against them every step of the way, and the studio basically gave her control to veto anything she didn't like. It could've been a much different series if Johnson and Marcell were in charge and were able to adapt it with all of the changes they felt necessary.

The "What If" would be "The movies wouldn't exist" because the movies' success is tied to Ericka Mitchell's support and her not telling the fans to skip it. There's no "What If" where the person that wrote these books isn't going to be a control freak

Like, you might as well ask "What if the books were written by Tolkien" because both scenarios are about as connected to reality.

No, I think its fair. I also don't think Mitchell doesn't have nearly the vocal line to her fanbase that she thinks she does. Sure, MAYBE the fans who have been there since day one might listen to her, but this book sold like hot cakes. I highly doubt MOST of the adult women (target demographic) don't know who EL James is and don't really care to.

Considering it didn't have THAT large of a budget in the first place (40 mil against most big movies having around 100 mil), I honestly would have dared her. We already have the film rights. We already have the stars. The marketing is going strong. And the director and writer were clearly taking care of the film process and ACTUALLY cared about their actor's safety and comfort, unlike James and her cronies.

Do it. I dare you.

We've also seen smiliar adapatation disownership from big movies like Ender's Game. I mean, sure, that movie was BAD, but I don't think anyone was surprised or cared when Card was kicked to the curb.

Doesn't matter what you think. We know the studio thinks she does. (And Dan clearly does in his last video too)

Coz they DID cave.

Plus the deal included editorial control for Mitchell. So calling her bluff doesn't matter when you already gave her control.

So the question for "How would these movies be without her interference" require the books to be written by a different person who isn't a control freak and demands editorial rights when a studio offers her money for movie right. So you'd still be dealing with adaptations of different books.

Edited by Ghilz on Dec 4th 2018 at 10:34:26 AM

The Ender's Game movie flopped, so, not a great example of "doing our own thing apart from the author will bring success".

Not many actually cared that Card was disowned from his own adaptation. In fact, most of my friends who love Ender's Game also regularly say "Fuck Orson Scott Card".

My point is that Fan of Work =/= Fan of Creator.

I might also posit that James NOT having control over the movies (which, jfc, why was she ever given that in the first place?) would have probably made people even more curious about the films as people who hated them might be more inclined to see them if the abuse might actually be toned down.

Coz she'd not allow them the rights otherwise.