Winespring Inn

[Rose]

I read and enjoy YA novels. So all this "it's too YA" griping is just praise in my book ?

[DojoToad]

I don't know where the YA line is  and am unsure if it is automatically bad depending on what side it is on...

[king of nowhere]

YA is just a marketing tool. Mistborn is marketed as an adult book, but they decided to make a new edition, with a new cover - focusing more heavily on vin - and a new blurb - focusing more heavily on vin and her inner struggles - and market it as YA. It's literally the same book.

 

Furthermore, it seems everyone has different ideas about it. For some it means "cheap high school romance", or "teenagers are heroes despite having no qualification for the job". For some it means "there's not enough sex and violence".

 

but we debated the stuff about YA weeks ago, at length. I fear we are starting to argue back in circles. We got new material, we said what we had to say about it, now we're running out of arguments...

[DojoToad]

So I imagine there can be good YA as well as bad YA...

 

I guess it comes down to whether I like it or not independent of the 'category'

[Rose]

12 minutes ago, DojoToad said:

I don't know where the YA line is  and am unsure if it is automatically bad depending on what side it is on...

 

YA novels are supposed to be coming of age stories, characters figuring out who they are and finding their place in the world. There's usually (but not always) a romantic arc. They're less graphic than adult novels, both in terms of sex scenes and violence, but that doesn't mean there isn't sex or violence, just that it's portrayed through a different lens. They're also shorter. YA contemporary is usually under 80-90k words, and YA fantasy debuts rarely go over 120k. Sequels or novels by established authors can be longer. Characters are under 20 years old (a few years ago, it had to be under 18, but recent YA fantasies tend to have older protagonists) and there aren't usually more than 2-3 POV characters, although some fantasy series definitely break that rule. YA fantasy series are generally duologies or trilogies, but there are 4- and 5-book series too. Longer series were more common when YA SFF was booming in the early 2010s. Publishers are more cautious now so standalones are duologies are increasingly common.

[CaddySedai]

54 minutes ago, DojoToad said:

Consider me chastened.

 

I might still like it though...

 

Masochist. ?

[CaddySedai]

And like KoN said its a circular argument now. With literally no basis in any actual scenes or imagery that has yet been shown. 

[TheMountain]

I think it's important to note again that a lack of nudity doesn't automatically mean YA. For example, The Expanse is definitely not YA. It's all gritty realism, top notch writing, mature plotlines, some pretty explicit gore/violence, and excellent acting. One thing it does not have much of however is nudity. I was just watching an episode where one of the main characters has a "morning after" situation... and of course, somehow her blanket is wrapped tightly around her chest, as if trying to maintain her modesty with the man she just slept with lol. It jolts me out of universe for a bit (my suspension of disbelief bar is very high) and I groan when I see this Trope in shows and movies, but if it isn't part of an overall pattern, it doesn't affect my enjoyment too much.

 

Edited October 11, 2021 by TheMountain

[templar7]

On 10/9/2021 at 5:16 PM, DojoToad said:

Right.  We won't know until we see it all in context.  That's why the teaser got ripped apart - what we saw left a lot of folks uncomfortable with certain aspects.  So far with the Winespring trailer, the only real stand out 'could have been better' moment was Lan's entrance - and that might even make better sense when seen in the episode.

 

Damn - still 5+ weeks to go.

I agree. I just can't get past that entrance scene... uughh...  But you're right! It's the only part that, as you say, could have been better. I think I bumped up against it so much on 1st viewing that It kind of took over my overall opinion. Thanks to you, and others, I'm seeing the forest through the trees now. Lets see what the full episode says. Though I still have trouble trying to see how that entrance can really satisfy, even in context. We shall see.

[templar7]

On 10/11/2021 at 12:14 PM, swollymammoth said:

Rand and Perrin were talking about whatever the heck ceremony the showrunners invented for Egwene to undergo. Came off like generic YA trash and reminded me of the MTV Shannara show. 

Though I didn't have an issue with that part, I understand exactly what you mean about "Sword of Shannara" ...  For me it was L&M's intro. 

 

On 10/11/2021 at 12:14 PM, swollymammoth said:

the whole scene just smacks of less creative people trying their hands at a story from someone infinitely more talented than themselves. 

My thoughts exactly!

[templar7]

On 10/11/2021 at 9:49 AM, mogi68 said:

Ever walk into a small town bar at the ass end of nowhere at 1am as a stranger? Yeah, it's going to feel a little awkward

Ya but it was the bar that seemed to feel awkward... The strangers walked in like something from an anime cartoon.

[Elder_Haman]

26 minutes ago, templar7 said:

Ya but it was the bar that seemed to feel awkward... The strangers walked in like something from an anime cartoon.

I mean, that's not far from the truth though. It would be like Taylor Swift and Eminem walked into a corner bar in Dubuque half an hour before closing time.

[CaddySedai]

Anime?

 

I’d have gone with a western.

 

And the spurs are correct … that part at least is what one would have heard. And honestly in a place like the TR the sound of spurs alone would have stopped a ton of conversation. Spurs are used for race or war trained horses, not on workhorses like would be common in TR or even the peddlers and gleemen with wagons attached.

 

Its almost like - imagine being in a place like a church or temple at a wedding and a loud door slams behind you. It stops everyone to look. Thats what them hearing spurs would be. You may have well told them that an entire occupying force was in town at that sound lol.

[TheMountain]

Look, we all want the show to succeed right? What percentage of the audience will groan (either aloud or internally) when they see Lan's entrance? What percentage of those people will read an explanation on a forum and go, "ah, that makes sense now, my mind has been changed and I no longer think this is cheesy. You have convinced me to give it another try."

 

I just don't see this scene as a net win.

[Elder_Haman]

21 minutes ago, TheMountain said:

What percentage of the audience will groan (either aloud or internally) when they see Lan's entrance?

Probably not that many. It's not that bad. It's just that we're all so obsessed and nitpicky that we break down a 60 second clip frame-by-frame.

 

And sure, your initial reaction may have been a groan - but if the rest of the episode hits, you're not going to remember that particular portion because it will have gone by so quickly. 

[DaddyFinn]

Everyone talks about this Shannara thing. Has anyone seen the Eragon movie? Now that's a terrible adaptation.

[AusLeviathan]

1 hour ago, DaddyFinn said:

Everyone talks about this Shannara thing. Has anyone seen the Eragon movie? Now that's a terrible adaptation.

I've always though the Eragon movie was a good adaption of the book.

 

Sure there were plenty of changes but the book was derivative and generic and the movie captured that well.

 

3 hours ago, TheMountain said:

 

I just don't see this scene as a net win.

It was a poorly chosen scene that presumably relies upon you seeing the Fade so that you could mistake Lan for it, knowing the Rand/Egwene relationship and understand what an Aes Sedai.

 

The marketing for this series is unfortunately really letting it down with it's focus on book fans and refusal to actually explain anything to people unfamiliar with WOT.

[zacz1987]

9 minutes ago, AusLeviathan said:

 

 

It was a poorly chosen scene

 

I agree. On its own this scene does not work well and I'm not sure why they chose it. It may be perfectly fine in the episode itself (though without seeing it we cannot really know) but it does not make for good teaser content.

 

I did wonder if they chose the scene because Mat does not play a major part. It mainly Rand, Perrin Nynaeve and Moirane and Lan. Due to the casting change they seem to want to avoid showing Mat as much as possible. 

 

I hope we get a full trailer soon as we are getting quite close to the release date.

Edited October 13, 2021 by zacz1987

[DaddyFinn]

14 minutes ago, AusLeviathan said:

I've always though the Eragon movie was a good adaption of the book.

 

Sure there were plenty of changes but the book was derivative and generic and the movie captured that well.

To each their own. I loved the book and liked the game(yes I know it's made after movie) but the movie was just so different than the book from start to finish. Some things were similar.

 

Spoiler

Eragon left Carvahall for totally different reason.

Urgals were just barbaric humans.

Durza was a goofy human.

Galbatorix was shown too much.

Ending.

 

Those things I remember. I have seen the movie only once. It sucked.

 

Positive things were Saphira and Brom.

 

Remake is rumoured to happen sometime. Hopefully that'll be gooood. Eragon is really generic but it still had amazing charm. I have read it probably a dozen times. The other books were also good. They were my starting point to fantasy.

[TheMountain]

I've heard a lot that the marketing has been aimed towards book fans, but as a big fan myself, I just don't see it. But that's another discussion..

 

Also, +1 to the Eragon movie being a horrible adaptation.  Yes, the books were derivative, but the Eragon movie was an abomination.

Edited October 13, 2021 by TheMountain

[JaimAybara]

When it comes to looks, I think there is something really important to address, CGI/practical effects balance. Particularly with magic systems. 
 

Ideally, both of these should be firing on all cylinders. However, regardless of how good CGI is these days, it still lacks a true tangibility in my opinion, which is only highlighted further when it gets better five years down the road. This is usually subconsciously picked up on when stunts are done in ultra ridiculous fashions, physical impossibilities , and through magic systems that look iffy. The best films/television series understand that the best marriage of these two things is outstanding practical effects in the foreground and if they had the ability at the time, CGI in the background.  
 

Examples that come to mind: 

 

1) Aliens - practical effects 

 

2) Ben Hur- set design of circus maximus chariot race.

 

3) Bladerunner - cityscapes / vehicles 

 

4) Terminator 2 - CGI paired with practical effects. (Hailed as one of the best ever for the pairing of both).

 

5) The Thing - Practical Effects 

 

6) Jurassic Park - Practical Effects and CGI that largely holds up if not surpasses even contemporary counterparts.

 

All of these films were able to capture either practical effects or CGI that was used so effectively and smartly that they were able to stand the test of time and in some instances hold up miraculously. 
 

Bad examples: 

 

1) Star Wars Episode I - The CGI in many instances didn’t age well, but everyone at the time wanted to try using more CGI. 

2) Wolverine - His claws alone…what happened? 
 

3) Green Lantern - Everything 

4) The Last Starfighter - Some decent practical effects and makeup, worst CGI ever. 
 

I suppose I’m interested in where this balance will be struck and how well each one will be executed. However, I’m an ardent believer of keeping most of the CGI in the background. I’ve heard the new Dune does a great job of this. As for the magic systems in Wheel of Time, I think I would have preferred mostly seeing the practical effect results vs. CGI weaves. Perhaps though they will only show us weaves at critical moments for world building reasons and then will not show it all the time. The other thought I had was what real world visuals could they have toyed with to layer in with the magic system and what will that look like as well. But too often I feel like when CGI is decided to be used it becomes the only thing they use to solve the particular problem. Instead of a mixture of things.
 

I see hokey/cheesy vibes come from four main areas visually: Bad sets, bad costuming, subpar CGI, and bad practical effects. This can be overcome or ignored with great stage presence, acting, and good storytelling but shouldn’t have to. Do YA movies have a lot of these in recent years? Yes. Do all of them? No. Not a fan of the YA brand, if it was an absolute that all YA was hot garbage then The Goonies wouldn’t be the classic that it is. 
 

Disclaimer: I think the sets look absolutely stunning, I have very high hopes for the Trollocs, the fade looks extremely creepy, costumes are mixed bag for me at the moment but I don’t hate them, and I’m really excited to see everything to determine where it lands regarding CGI/Practical Effects in context. 
 

 

Edited October 13, 2021 by JaimAybara

[AusLeviathan]

1 hour ago, DaddyFinn said:

Remake is rumoured to happen sometime.

The current focus on Fantasy certainly makes that possible but I think it's unlikely. Eragon was really popular with kids and teens in the mid 2000's but between the movie and the unsatisfactory ending of the last book it really lost a lot of hype. Then again they're adapting His Dark Materials and that had a movie adaption around the same time which was just as bad so there's always hope.

 

1 hour ago, TheMountain said:

I've heard a lot that the marketing has been aimed towards book fans, but as a big fan myself, I just don't see it.

The clip was the perfect example of it.

 

Quite a bit is shown but you'd only understand it if you read the books. Names are said but they don't explain who they are, why they're there, what exactly is going one. Nothing about the clip sells the series to people unfamiliar.

 

The trailer had a similar issue of showing a lot of things fans recognize but not explaining things and it just doesn't work if the casual viewers aren't familiar with what they're seeing.

[TheMountain]

Or you can subscribe to the other theory, that the marketing was just bad.

 

95% of what I've seen has not been as described in the books, so I'm not really feeling the "for the fans" warm and fuzzies.

[AusLeviathan]

1 hour ago, TheMountain said:

95% of what I've seen has not been as described in the books, so I'm not really feeling the "for the fans" warm and fuzzies.

The marketing doesn't decide if props and designs will match the books, it just markets it, that things don't look exactly like they do in the books doesn't affect that the marketing has been very focused on showing a lot of things that only book fans would understand.

 

The first poster is another good example of marketing to fans as only a fan would understand what they were looking at. Compare it to the first GOT poster which whilst having a similar focus on a notable prop from the show was at least something people who didn't know the series would be able to understand the purpose and meaning of just by looking at it.

 

And yes that first poster was meant to pander to the fans, when Rafe introduced it he said it represented a scene that fans would immediately recognize. Admittedly that did make it funny when weeks later fans were still arguing over whether the prop on the poster was a Waygate or something else.

Edited October 13, 2021 by AusLeviathan

[DojoToad]

55 minutes ago, TheMountain said:

Or you can subscribe to the other theory, that the marketing was just bad.

 

95% of what I've seen has not been as described in the books, so I'm not really feeling the "for the fans" warm and fuzzies.

Marketing should be directed at folks that haven’t read the books. Need to draw in the bigger audience.

 

I will watch the show whether I like the marketing or not (at least for a few episodes). Someone who is not invested in the books will only watch it if their interest is piqued.

 

So people that have a casual or no ties to the books won’t care if characters, props, settings match. The show is interesting or not based on the marketing they see. As a long-time fan, it is difficult for me to know if the marketing would work on me without any knowledge of the books.

 

We'll know if the marketing was a success or not based on the number of watchers.

Edited October 13, 2021 by DojoToad