RichSpider

There were so many lessons to learn from seeing TLOU 1 success compared to TLOU 2. The value placed in the Joel + Ellie dynamic, Joel being one of the most iconic survivalists across all of gaming. Him getting rope-a-doped by a gang of pansexuals wasn't believable then. We also hated it. HBO knows we hated it. They still did it. I can't believe they did it. 100% uninterested in the Bella show. She did a good job last season. Usually good in all that she's in. But I'm not hanging around for her.

It's an absolute joke at this point. If Disney set out on a mission to ensure that younger generations are only shown the original trilogy and the prequels, I don't think they could have done a better job. The Acolyte is yet another contribution to the slop that Disney Star Wars has been releasing but taken to the max levels of carelessness and shallowness. Way to go!

They took everything that was special and enjoyable about Barry and turned it on it's head. Powerful? sure. Something I enjoyed or would even care to remember? No. This whole season was like the Sopranos boardwalk episode(s) but supposedly happened? Eh. I'll count 1-3 as canon.

Always have loved Woody. Have even liked Theroux since The Leftovers. But dear lord, these two together are something else! Take the the chemistry from True Detective S1 and then make it goofy - This is what we're working with and it's amazing. Also, Lena Headey is an angel and I had no clue.

This is the key for me. If you are going to adapt award-winning source material that's beloved by many fans, whatever changes you make better have either A) a great reason behind it or B) improve the story. So far I've watched The Expanse incredibly faithfully adapt the novels to TV as best as they can and why is that show so beloved? The quality of the story is extremely high. For the non-book readers that in of itself is great. But for the book readers, they know the quality is so damn high because the quality of the novels is so damn high and so the showrunner and writers room (including the book's authors) faithfully adapted it to preserve that high-quality storytelling. I have also watched Game of Thrones in earlier seasons where they were largely faithful adaptations of award-winning novels and how beloved were they? Intensely. Even Dune recently was made highly faithfully and the book readers have loved it. I haven't finished this season yet (almost there) but I'm scared seeing how many are saying the last two episodes are the worst of all. But so far, as someone who has read the books twice, loved them but isn't above adaptations taking a different spin (if it improves the story) I am really disappointed. Not by the visuals, the acting, or anything like that. It is entirely due to the showrunner and writer's decision to make changes needlessly that make the story WORSE, not better. Why do they feel the need to add their twists and their own touch? Likely fear or ego. They don't feel creatively excited about translating a story from one medium to another they want to make it "their own." The hubris of that when the source material is award-winning and they're just TV writers is incredible. It **** because I could overlook some shakey acting here and there or a bad costume or average CGI, but when the story is what I have a problem with and it's a story that requires certain things in order to result in other things down the line, it makes watching the show so tough. I end up just feeling bad for Henry who considering what he's said in multiple interviews, just wishes the show was a faithful adaptation from the novels to the screen like The Expanse has been.

This is the key for me. If you are going to adapt award-winning source material that's beloved by many fans, whatever changes you make better have either A) a great reason behind it or B) improve the story. So far I've watched The Expanse incredibly faithfully adapt the novels to TV as best as they can and why is that show so beloved? The quality of the story is extremely high. For the non-book readers that in of itself is great. But for the book readers, they know the quality is so damn high because the quality of the novels is so damn high and so the showrunner and writers room (including the book's authors) faithfully adapted it to preserve that high-quality storytelling. I have also watched Game of Thrones in earlier seasons where they were largely faithful adaptations of award-winning novels and how beloved were they? Intensely. Even Dune recently was made highly faithfully and the book readers have loved it. I haven't finished this season yet (almost there) but I'm scared seeing how many are saying the last two episodes are the worst of all. But so far, as someone who has read the books twice, loved them but isn't above adaptations taking a different spin (if it improves the story) I am really disappointed. Not by the visuals, the acting, or anything like that. It is entirely due to the showrunner and writer's decision to make changes needlessly that make the story WORSE, not better. Why do they feel the need to add their twists and their own touch? Likely fear or ego. They don't feel creatively excited about translating a story from one medium to another they want to make it "their own." The hubris of that when the source material is award-winning and they're just TV writers is incredible. It **** because I could overlook some shakey acting here and there or a bad costume or average CGI, but when the story is what I have a problem with and it's a story that requires certain things in order to result in other things down the line, it makes watching the show so tough. I end up just feeling bad for Henry who considering what he's said in multiple interviews, just wishes the show was a faithful adaptation from the novels to the screen like The Expanse has been.