Which is not the point.
The point is that they wasted money on the source material when they could have just done their own thing instead.
Comment on Antony Starr is glad ‘The Boys’ is ending: “I don’t like seeing things outstay their welcome”
njm1314@lemmy.world 1 week agoMan I read those Comics they were garbage. Even pretending that the characters had depth to them in the comics is absurd. The show added so much more depth and interesting aspects to the characters than those stupid Comics did. They were legit bad. The only good part in the comic was the overall world. The show added everything that’s special about the concept.
southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
njm1314@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Yeah there’s a lot of times that sentiment is true. This is not one of those times. This isn’t someone taking a story and bastardizing it to make a different story. This is people with creative ability taking a story that’s like an inch deep and adding everything to it. It’s not that they’re telling a different story, it’s that they’re telling the story that Garth Ennis should have told if he wasn’t as shit writer.
southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
I mean, you’re welcome to that opinion, but it still isn’t the same thing I’m talking about because what I’m saying is that it doesn’t matter how good or bad either version is at all.
See, when a production company buys or options an IP, they aren’t doing it blind. They’re partially paying for the established fan base.
Once you step far enough away from what made those people fans in the first place, again regardless of quality, the less value that IP still has because it isn’t the same thing at all.
I get it, you don’t like Ennis as a writer at all, no big. I think he’s kinda mid overall, an idea man with meh to poor execution over the run of most of his arcs. He’s bad at taking established characters and writing them, but his own are consistent. Yes, consistently hammy and overwrought, but that’s actually harder than it seems.
But, again, that has nothing to do with the concept of adapting an established property and scrubbing it being shitty. Doesn’t matter how well you do it, it’s a waste.
Those writers for the show could have come up with some kind of show on their own instead of being given the sorry job of retreading someone else’s work. It doesn’t matter if the end result was fight club or queen of the damned, once you start abandoning core pieces of the work, you’re wasting resources, and insulting the people you’re counting on to be your initial audience.
It’s like the live action disney shit. The same time, effort, and money could have gone into something original. But, in this case, the production company started with something they didn’t already own.
njm1314@lemmy.world 1 week ago
You keep saying that it’s beside the point. It’s not. I get your point. It’s not an overly novel argument. I’ve made the exact same argument multiple times. It’s a very commonly made argument. I get it. 100%. Nothing about what you’re saying is a mystery to me whatsoever.
What I’m saying is it doesn’t apply to this scenario. This is not people taking an IP and pushing Their Own Story into it. This is people taking an IP and expanding it to degree to which the incompetent original author wasn’t capable of. It’s in no way like live action Disney at all. Not even remotely. They put so much more effort and Care into this story then the original author ever did. Than he’s ever capable of. This is creative people taking a concept and fulfilling it. They’re not scrubbing the work they’re finishing it. Do you see what I’m saying?
To put it in comic terms, all Garth Ennis did was the rough sketch. Not even the draft before it’s colored, but the very first roughest sketch available. The show did everything else. The story the show tells for the most part is there in his book, almost all of the story elements the show tells originate in the book, he just never bothered to fulfill it or expand upon it. Or even considered it at all really. Because he’s a cringe-worthy loser who didn’t actually want to write anything meaningful or impactful.
Omegamanthethird@lemmy.world 1 week ago
I don’t think they are suggesting Butcher had depth. Just that they think the core of the characters and what made them interesting was changed needlessly.
By the way, I also loved the show Preacher and I’m glad they changed it from the comics. But I also understand being upset by it. Sometimes I want adaptations to get the core of the characters right and sometimes I’m totally fine with a more inspired interpretation of a story that I like.
njm1314@lemmy.world 1 week ago
But there was nothing interesting about the characters of the comic is my point. Depth is what makes characters interesting. The show adds literally everything you think is interesting about that store in those characters. I mean really I don’t know if you’ve never read it but those comics are absurd. Butcher and his boys are basically Garth Ennis projecting how much he hates superheroes on to comic book pages. It’s just him thinking how awesome it is to murder Comic Book Heroes. That’s it there’s there’s no depth of character there’s nothing interesting there. It’s a bad comic.