3 ms·
To be fair, re: first point, they could have just liked the actress. Or even had a prior contract deal. And really are you going to tell anyone today, they ca
by b112 3y ago
To be fair, re: first point, they could have just liked the actress. Or even had a prior contract deal. And really are you going to tell anyone today, they can't play a role because of their ethnicity, unless it is key, pivotal to that role?
The second seems more plausible as a marketing tactic.
Re: book to script, I found I go less insane, if I just think of it this way. Two people were involved in events, one wrote a book, one a script.
In as those two people would have seen different things, talked to different people, been more/less involved in events, and just interpret the world differenty, as we all do, it makes sense their output would differ.
Thusly, I remain sane. Or perhaps less insane.
- TeMPOraL 3y ago> Re: book to script, I found I go less insane, if I just think of it this way. Two people were involved in events, one wrote a book, one a script. I go further than that - I explicitly prefer seeing the movie/show adaptation before going through the original books. I'm aphantasic - reading a book, I just can't picture anything in my mind. Every character and every scenery is mostly this cloud of facts, like an unresolved promise (the async programming kind), that I carry in my head 'till the last page. Seeing a movie/show, however, gives characters specific appearance, specific voice, specific cadence. Primed with those images and sounds, I find reading source material much easier and more enjoyable. And yes, as much as adaptations differ from the original, I don't mind. I can fix the inconsistencies on the fly, or separate the book reality from movie/show reality entirely. It's not a big deal. Meanwhile, having some specific images and sounds to anchor my barely-existing imagination to, is very helpful to me.