Devil Dog Hog
Space Marshal
I blinked, is the dumpster still burning?
Death of a Bebop
- Thread starter Shadow Reaper
- Start date
That's Netflix and a lot of the newer streaming services for ya. They take their chances. It's the tossing 'shit on the wall and seeing what sticks' approach to content production.
I've worked on my far share of shows that were helmed by absolute amateurs. On one hand it's great that they're giving opportunities for new talent (The Duffer brothers from Stranger Things being examples of prominent beneficiaries) which is terrific. On the other hand it can really expose well....the hacks. I'm talking about directors who don't understand the concept of blocking a scene or properly reading daily slides. Writers who are in love with their dialog and 'say it, not show it'. etc. etc. Production Managers who whine about saving nickels and dimes....then bitch about DOPs making scenes too dark because the poor guy can't afford a $500 Arri Fresnel to light a scene properly.
Anyway in the case of Cowboy Bebop....yeah. Whoops.
I lasted up to episode 2 before I dumped it and no....it had nothing to do with blah blah Faye too 'woke' blah blah.
Last edited:
That’s fine! Those two are err siblings!if you think hollywood live action is bad you dont want to see japanese....
the japanese live action went way off script and it was so low budget and cringy lol. the only live action from an anime i like(but is still kind of meh) is gantz 1 and 2. it does go away from the correct story to but in a good way for the 2nd movie. honestly it revived the whole series to where they made another netflix movie.
I am all for Netflix taking their chances and am honestly glad for it as I have a feeling we will see even more great content. Hopefuly the hacks will be found out quickly and not allowed to continue to make terrible content.
Yeah I'm fine with it too. There will always be people who fall through the cracks though....people who fail their way upwards. Sometimes it's something as seemingly harmless as letting a writer direct a project because of past success as a writer. Other times it's giving a young short film festival winner a chance at a big TV show only to find the poor kid completely out of their league. Unfortunately the skillsets don't always transfer and the results aren't always positive.
I'm fine with all that because you want fresh new content and fresh new talent. It's a risk studio/network execs have accepted as the price to pay to unearth the next Game of Thrones, Stranger Things, Squid Game, etc.
What I cannot abide is blatant nepotism. The industry is notorious for putting people in positions of authority based on their personal relationships. This can often come with disastrous if not deadly results (ie. The idiot set armorer on that Alec Baldwin show).
To play Devil's Advocate on the side of Netflix to a degree, there is a really good series they've made based on a series of movies & that is The Witcher. I believe that this is a prime example of how an adaptation from 1 medium to another is treated well.
I know quiet a few ppl who would vehemently disagree with that statement as they have read the books the first season was based on (or short stories mostly) and there is a ton a things wrong with it, excluding surface level things like gender and race and hair color changes. Still I found the first season pretty damn enjoyable as I haven't read the books and don't care to. As for the second season though I heard its kinda rough...
But I'll hold judgment until I watched it.
Ya know, I do wanna go Yaaay on this cancelation cos it deserved it and it shows that Netflix does care about where it's money goes to some extent at least. It's the sensible thing to do, something that goes against spreading "the Message". That is a good thing for getting more quality over quantity in the future.
On the other hand, I would really loved to have seen a proper adaptation with maybe some more background story and world building, expanding a little bit on some elements. Seeing as how no one seems to have any new ideas I'm pretty sure there will be another attempt at this in the not too distant future.
Witcher Season 2 was kinda meh for me. My wife read the books and she wasn't impressed they deviated quite a bit from the source material. As far as production values, wardrobe and overall budget, it's definitely an improvement over Season 1 though (Yay! No more Nilfgaard scrotum armor!).
As for Netflix dumping Bebop, it's all about the ratings and viewership numbers. Netflix doesn't do Nielsen ratings like traditional Network TV. They have their own internal viewership metrics system that they guard pretty closely. Shows generally get two seasons before Netflix decides whether to renew or dump. The fact that Bebop was cancelled within a month of it's release means that it was well....really bad. If it's a cheaper show, it can still be salvaged as the ROI isn't too bad. A VFX heavy show like Bebop was never gonna be cheap to make versus say Tiger King lol.
Also...what do you mean about spreading "the Message"? We talking about 'Go Woke, Go Broke' stuff? Nah man....Netflix execs don't care about that stuff. That's just what guys on YouTube harp on about when a show/game/whatever doesn't conform to their world view. These dudes often pat themselves on the back when something gets canceled. They think they're the ones who made it so when in reality they have zero influence in whether something makes it or not. I've actually had conversations with Netflix and Disney above the line types. They really don't give a shit.
Clearly those bigoted youtubers harping on about wokeness have their world view set to the same as most of the audience. There is a reason why shit shows like this make a loss and get axed...
I do believe you, clearly both Netflix and the mouse want to make money, thus the changes in programming and leadership. The lady that got appointed to Disney head is a real hard hitter in the financial sphere and she will want to see much better numbers than what for example Eternals made, and won't care about any bloody politics if it gets her those numbers. I sense a change is coming, hopefully for more quality over YouTuber talking points.
Anyways:
It seems like 50+ thousand of the viewers haven't watched the original or understood what made it good, there is already a petition to bring this back... Frankly I don't care if they get their wish and they make a second season or not. It's not my money, there are plenty of other things to watch on Netflix.
GrumpyCat
Space Marshal
This wasn't a break down about why adaptations fail.. it was a dude ranting over and over about "THE MESSAGE" lol.
What a tit. He didn't even provide any examples besides, "oh they changed her clothes a little".
I'll like to think that vocal Youtubers who are for or against a show are well.....the vocal minority. Content creator giants like Netflix look primarily at their own internal viewership metrics with external services like Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes having some say...albeit at a lesser scale. There's also traditional heavy weight publications like Variety that execs still look up to.
Believe me....random "JoeAwesomeComicBookGuyReviewsMovies" Youtubers have zero impact on productions. They're ignored not necessarily because of their worldview but because there are simply too many of them. 'It's all Noise' is what somebody 'In the Know' has told me. If you start listening to randoms on Youtube, Twiter, Reddit, etc. you end up with something we call 'Filmmaking by Committee'....basically an incoherent mess with no real direction. The only real venue folks can have a say are at carefully curated venues like Comic-Con. If I'm a Showrunner on a big project I don't have the time or patience to accept unsolicited stuff from Youtube or whatever. Not happy about a project? Go make your own or if you're me....don't watch it lol.
Have studios, networks, and streaming services sacrifice quality in order to satisfy notions of Political Correctness? I honestly can't answer that question. Maybe? What I can say is that impotent Nerd Rage doesn't do anything to change the minds of those who are 'Above the Line'.
They're barking up the wrong tree. The show won't be saved because it sucks and it's too expensive to justify another season.
The people who make the kinds of decisions such as axing a show are generally the "studio execs". I don't know anything about the internals of Netflix, but if we presume they're the same as others, there is a small group of middle management that make the decisions. Who knows if they watch online critics? Critical Drinker is different than most as he is a successful screenwriter, so who knows? Studio Execs also stipulate to series creators what they want to see and if they don't get it, the series is cancelled.
One of the most famous examples of what people consider studio exec fuckup was the cancellation of Firefly. People cite today's continuing following of the series as evidence is was so good it should not have been cancelled. Of course the execs could not know such a following would develop when they didn't see the numbers as it first aired. What they did know was that even though they told Joss Whedon the show's Western flavor was too much and he needed to tone it down, he refused. They specifically told him no horses and he ignored them. They told him to replace the sawed off lever action rifle and Mal's revolver and he ignored them. It's kind of amazing Whedon made it as many episodes as he did, since he was getting paid by these guys and they were paying around $10M/episode to have him ignore them. Had the execs not had Whedon pissing in their porriage, they would likley have moved Firefly to a timeslot it could better compete in, but they chose to instead just cancel the show (which does great harm to a creator's reputation.)
Was Whedon's vision better than the execs? Obviously. Should the execs have axed the show. Obviously. In fact, Whedon earned their ire so well that he recounted these things on the directors notes to the DVD and let the studio publish them--so full of himself was he, he even bragged about writing the series stoned, back when weed was still illegal. Worst is, the execs later did him dirty again, by removing the entire advertising budget for Serenity so it would likewise fail. Now that was dirty, and truly punishing, but this is why you treat your employer with respect. Hollywood has never had anything approaching ethics. There is only power, and the execs actually cost the studio millions to teach Whedon his "proper place".
We can look back and judge the "asshole studio execs" cancelled Star Trek, or Firefly, or Bebop, but these guys are essentially bean counters. If they don't see the numbers watching, they can't sell advertisements and if they can't do that, they lose their jobs. Usually they make decent calls.
Fact is, when a new series loses most of its viewers after the second episode, it deserves to be canned. The people voted with their viewership. Critical Drinker called it straight I think. The changes made due to philosophical bias were all excoriated by the fans, who then stopped watching.
I guess we know where the ultimate power is.
One of the most famous examples of what people consider studio exec fuckup was the cancellation of Firefly. People cite today's continuing following of the series as evidence is was so good it should not have been cancelled. Of course the execs could not know such a following would develop when they didn't see the numbers as it first aired. What they did know was that even though they told Joss Whedon the show's Western flavor was too much and he needed to tone it down, he refused. They specifically told him no horses and he ignored them. They told him to replace the sawed off lever action rifle and Mal's revolver and he ignored them. It's kind of amazing Whedon made it as many episodes as he did, since he was getting paid by these guys and they were paying around $10M/episode to have him ignore them. Had the execs not had Whedon pissing in their porriage, they would likley have moved Firefly to a timeslot it could better compete in, but they chose to instead just cancel the show (which does great harm to a creator's reputation.)
Was Whedon's vision better than the execs? Obviously. Should the execs have axed the show. Obviously. In fact, Whedon earned their ire so well that he recounted these things on the directors notes to the DVD and let the studio publish them--so full of himself was he, he even bragged about writing the series stoned, back when weed was still illegal. Worst is, the execs later did him dirty again, by removing the entire advertising budget for Serenity so it would likewise fail. Now that was dirty, and truly punishing, but this is why you treat your employer with respect. Hollywood has never had anything approaching ethics. There is only power, and the execs actually cost the studio millions to teach Whedon his "proper place".
We can look back and judge the "asshole studio execs" cancelled Star Trek, or Firefly, or Bebop, but these guys are essentially bean counters. If they don't see the numbers watching, they can't sell advertisements and if they can't do that, they lose their jobs. Usually they make decent calls.
Fact is, when a new series loses most of its viewers after the second episode, it deserves to be canned. The people voted with their viewership. Critical Drinker called it straight I think. The changes made due to philosophical bias were all excoriated by the fans, who then stopped watching.
I guess we know where the ultimate power is.
They don't. They use Metacritic, aggregate review sites like Rotten Tomatoes for traditional reviews and internal metrics/Nielsen ratings for viewership numbers.
Who? I genuinely have no idea who he is prior to this video being posted here. I have a longer IMDB profile than he does and I haven't bothered to update my profile in years. I did get a bit curious and watched a bit of his previous stuff. The general take for me is that his videos last about 5 minutes before he goes on his customary rant about SJW and Feminism ruining shows....'The Message' if you will. I mean I'm cool when guys pump out that stuff and are blatant about it. What irritates me is that he tip toes around being upfront about it and presents himself as an objective reviewer when he clearly isn't. Rarely anything about story structure breakdown and comments about cinematography which is the stuff I look for...just a lot of anti-SJW ranting. Oh and he really...really...really hates Brie Larsson. He did like one of the shows I worked on last year though so err...Yay?
Yeah no disagreement there. Firefly had the misfortune of being stuck with a Network that didn't really give Science Fiction stuff a chance (FOX). It also had the misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time when people were beginning to move away from watching live broadcast to watching on DVD post-broadcast. The whole business model was changing as folks didn't wanna 'tune' in anymore, they wanted to watch something on their own time. This was all pre-Netflix mind you but the early signs were there.
I think the show was canceled because of a combination of poor writing, poor story structure, clumsy dialog, weak editing, and generally poor direction. I'm a film guy and I wasn't impressed. My wife isn't a film guy and she wasn't impressed. Neither of us stopped watching because of 'philosophical' bias. We certainly had no idea about the faux-outrage involving the Faye Valentine character and the actor who portrays her.
66% Bean counters 33% Viewers.
Yup.
But seriously, CD is fucking awesomeness incarnate. Listen in closely, and set your bullshit politics aside. The guy is hysterical, and dead spot on.
Easy with the gushing, he makes some ok points but it boils down to 'Remakes suck', leave our 'Heroes Alone'. That's hardly an original view and what he's talking about has been beaten to death already. Hollywood's crime has been the ongoing overload of remakes/reboots. I'll also say that the abandoning of the tried and proven Hero's Journey template within the industry of Western Storytelling is something audiences find unpalatable. The problem has much to do with character development being inconsistent because a character 'arc' is often spread out over several films and different screenwriters. James Cameron's Sarah Connor isn't the same as David Goyer's Sarah Connor. Likewise Lawrence Kasden's Luke Skywalker isn't the same as JJ Abrams/Chris Terrio's Luke Skywalker. The Marvel Cinematic Universe works overall because you have an uber comic book nerd in the form of Kevin Feige overseeing EVERYTHING with an invisible hand. This guarantees some semblance of character consistency and in-universe Canon observance.
I'll even go so far as to argue that we should STOP with remakes/reboots. Some remakes work (Bladerunner 2049, Dune, etc) because the franchises have exited public memory long enough for the folks who've picked it up to start fresh. Stuff like Star Wars and Terminator on the other hand come laden with enormous baggage and expectations.
In many ways we have only ourselves to blame. We as audiences are unwilling to give new intellectual properties a shot preferring to stick with stuff we already know. Films/TV shows have gotten so expensive to make that Studios/Networks can't stomach taking risks anymore. Ask yourself this. Would films like Star Wars: A New Hope (1977) or Back to the Future (1985) see the light of day in today's production climate?
Going back to this 'Critical Drinker' guy...I'll say again that he says nothing new. He certainly does himself a disservice when he rants about 'Diversity casting' and 'Defeminizing Female characters'. He's not a film critic, he's an obnoxious talking head with Right Wing views. A Ben Shaprio for films if you will. One quick peek at any of his videos' comment page tells you all you need to know of his target audience who fawn over his every word. Again...nothing wrong with that as long as people remember that A) He's an Op Ed, NOT a Critic and B) Studios/Networks do not care ONE IOTA what guys like him think. Kudos to this guy for having an audience and capitalizing on it I suppose. Man's gotta eat.
Also if this guy is so awesome why hasn't he come up with his own films already? Perhaps its because filmmaking is an extremely expensive, time consuming process that cannot be undertaken alone? Perhaps it's a collaborative process that requires you to keep your ego in check? Ultimately It's much easier to bash then to create.
Those who Can't, Rant.
Last edited:
I haven't got my arse in gear to get a sub yet to see it, but from this discription it sounds like everything those familiar with the source material know and love BeBop for was missed.
Writing as tight as a drum, a feature-length amount of story in a half-hour episode, short, sharp dialog with not a word wasted, editing which in places made frame-for-frame homage duplicates of some of the best martial arts fight scenes in cinima history and direction which drove the show to its conclusion from the very first episode, not that you'd know it.
To give an example of where this was potentialy missed from the original run itsef:
Not to criticise the original in any way, but... (You know it's coming when there is a but):
The Cowboy Bebop movie which came out after the series ran, while a delight as it was fully animated with the original voice cast, did feel out of place with the original cannon being set as it was between two episodes in the timeline. Not sure where but I think its between 16 and 17 [edit - nope looked it up, between 22 and 23] The snappy pacing the series viewers were familiar with didn't seem present in the longer form and the writing didn't seem as sharp as one would be familiar with... That's how it seemed to me anyway, its not bad. If you have not seen it give it a try but temper your expectations and you will not be disappointed, and tell 'em Sporky Dorky sent you ;-)
If I get some time over the Xmas (I work in retail, fat chance hahaha) i'll try to give the Live Action Version a review.
Last edited:
Some adaptations are best well...left alone lol. I don't fault Netflix for trying even it's something nobody asked for.
Anime for one is tricky because of the relevant subject matter and the possible 'lost in translation' landmines.
Last edited: