/lit/ - Literature

>>18566499
Plays shouldn't count desu, any competent filmed play will be on par with a staged version.

>>18566499
Lmao no
Literally read more Shakespeare

bump

>>18566499
Christopher Plummer as Hamlet has a much better handle on his character, and the shots in this film version are so much more meaningful.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ay2I7py3Og

>>18567077
Thanks for the recommendation, I haven't watched many old movies, would you recommend any?

>>18566499
>plays
>books
The film is closer to the original experience than reading it in book form.

>>18566499

>>18566499
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muLAzfQDS3M

>>18567661
by Ron Howard?

>>18566533
Then why are 99.999% of film adaptations bad or even terrible?

2001: A Space Odyssey
No Country For Old Men

but best of all... Fear and Loathing In Las Vegas

>>18567661
Doesn't this go for all of his books?
I've always felt they just read like I was reading a movie. Tho I felt inferno was a bit botched despite that.

>>18567633
wtf is this AAAAHAHAHAAHAHA
why is Hamlet a black dude?

>>18567551
Film is a visual medium my dude. Shakespeare is mostly auditory or oral. You can do Shakespeare on a radio and it would still be awesome. Filming it adds nothing but takes away a lot.

>>18568048
Mainly due to money. Films are usually way more expensive to make than a play which means that films often need to dumb down everything to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

>>18568048
>why are 99.9999% of adaptations bad or terrible
They're not. This is Harry Potter teen revisionism

>>18567142
Axe your netflix subscription and pay for Criterion Channel instead. You can knock the great glassic auteurs of cinema off one by one on there. You have no idea how much better film was than it is now. You're like a person who hasn't read a book published after 1998, asking for if there are any worth reading.
For a more direct answer: watch "Aguirre: The Wrath of God" and "Nosterafu: the Vampyre." Watch "La Strada" and "8 1/2". Watch Antonioni's trilogy. Watch as much Bunuel and Kurosawa as they have. Buy a Hitchcock collection and watch those. All of them. Watch "Metropolis" and "The Big Heat". Fuck dude. Get into classic cinema. It's based af.

>>18568934
*a book published BEFORE 1998

>>18568934
Don’t forget that Andrei Tarkovsky. Mosfilm put up all of his works on youtube in crisp restoration. Have you read the Bible then it’s a must.

>>18568960
FUCK YES bro. "Stalker" is one of my favourite films. But I think it might be a little steep for someone freshly weaned from cape shit.

Can we post adaptations that are better than the book?

>>18568934
>You have no idea how much better studio films were than now.
ftfy >>18567142 anon don't be le wrong generation geezer subsribe to mubi and watch new stuff too

>>18568996
There are cool indie things being done, but budget and studio support matters. The infrastructure/culture/money no longer exists for people to make truly high quality art cinema that rivals the greats from the 60s and 70s. The only place I've seen glimmers of hope is in the horror genre with directors like Eggers, getting big names to star in his "The Lighthouse".

>>18568889
Harry Potter isn't a fucking play moron

>>18568934
based kinoseur, listen to this guy. CChannel just added a suite of neo-noir this month that are god-tier cinema.

>>18566499
That was good but Branagh was too old. (Also, Osric stabbing himself out of nowhere was weird...did that have a precedent anywhere?)

>>18568975
Pic was better.

>>18568934
>Nosterafu: the Vampyre
>Metropolis
>8 1/2
>Hitchcock
>Kurosawa
art hoe tier no jk i just wanted to say it before someone else did. also 1998 is a bit specific, did something come out that year?

>>18568975
Pic was way better.

>>18566499
Directed by the author. It isn't great but it's still very good. (Apparently, there was a lot of studio interference...they forced him to reshoot the ending so there would be an exorcism and change the title from "Legion" to "Exorcist III").

>>18569173
Better to start babby off with some bangers instead of pitching him into the muck of obscurer, more difficult stuff. Even Hitchcock will seem slow to someone who's grown accustomed to the pacing of contemporary cinema.
1998 was an arbitrary point. Seems about where normies would draw the line between relevant and "ew yuck old"

>>18568934
It isn't widely available outside Norther America but this guy is 100% correct.

>>18569206
>doubt

>>18566499
Too bad the complete version is a "lost film."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Idiot_(1951_film)

>>18567859
An edgy theater fag at my high school almost got expelled because he decided he want to roleplay as Stanley. He threatened to hit two of the theater girls and a teacher over the course if a few days, but was half stuttering and visibly nervous each time. It was the most pathetic, least effectual attempted show of dominance I've ever seen.
Anyway he's now slinging cocktails at a D-tier Manhattan lounge and is shacked up with one of our obese classmates. They live in a hovel in Washington Heights. I think he's still convinced he'll make it as a stage actor. I guess at least he made it to New York?

>>18566526
Any other adaptations into mediums other than film?

>>18569033
There are tons of great arthouse films being made today, moneyed or no. The problem is distribution and exhibition (ie you're not likely to catch much truly worthwhile outside the festival circuit), although the US has always been shit in that front. France's reputation for filmmaking owes a great debt to a wonderful arthouse circuit that doesn't exist in the States and never has. Lack of exhibition opportunities is a greater hurdle to overcome than a lack of money or studio financing. Also A24 is next to Neon as the preeminent mid-major so Egger's relevance to truly independent film is pretty tenuous.

>>18569105
Not really the point was it?

>>18569556
>so Egger's relevance to truly independent film is pretty tenuous
I never claimed he represented truly independent filmmaking. I said he's one of the few directors who occupies a space in contemporary cinema where he has access to money, a large audience and recognizable actors while still making artsier and more abstract films.

>>18569613
bait?

>>18568934
Criterion Channel isn't available in my country

>>18569944
just use rarbg

>>18568975
Jurassic park

>>18566499

>>18570244
I misunderstood the question

>>18566499
The Decameron is just as funny as the tales it adapts.

>>18569725
Probably. But the story is so good it's hard to fuck up (e.g. english speakers have been reading a bad translation of a bad french translation and it's still held in very high regard).

>>18570792
In the midst of a conversation about kino cinema, Criterion Channel, and auteurs, when someone specifically brought up Tarkovsky, it seemed weird an anon would cite the remake of Solaris instead of the kino masterpiece version

>>18570236
No. They're honestly different enough and the film is so well made in terms of visual storytelling/technical aspects, that I don't think it's fair to say it's better.

>>18570799
Tarkovsky considered Solaris to be the least favorite of his films.

>>18569105
Yes it is.

>>18568934
don't watch 8 1/2 without le dolce vita, also blow-up while not as good as the trilogy is probably more relevant to our gen. also watch bergman.

>>18570829
>considered it to be the least favorite of his
yuckily cluttery

>>18568934
>>18568969
>>18569229
OP here, by 'I haven't watched many old movies' I meant 'I haven't watched many movies, and most of the ones that I have were new. I just watched anime instead (pre-2010, mostly) . As such, I haven't watched Star Wars beyond the movie in which Anakin is thrown into the lava, any superhero movies except Batman, and so on.

>>18566499
>>18571095

>>18570799
>Criterion Channel
Has the movie "White Dog" on it. The drama centering around a racist dog that kills black people (and how, for some reason, they don't just kill it because treating it will, for some reason, cure racism).

>"He's a White dog!"
>"Of course he's a white dog."
>"I don't mean his color! He's taught to attack and kill black people!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhkrvBNnAcw

>>18571159
Top kek! Fucking KINO.

>>18571159
But is it a good adaptation of the book?

>>18568489
More like the people making it just don't give a shit

>>18570799
The Soderbergh film is better.

>>18568934
Very nice, Fritz Lang was a genius

>>18571208
Probably.