TV/Movies Megathread

[Sophie Scholl]

All of the Dickens we read in school was heavily pared down and condensed, presumably to the detriment of the overall story and flow of things. I know I didn't care for a lot of the readings we had to do in that style at the time but have enjoyed some of the pieces after when I read them in full.

In addition to the abridged classics in High School, it was also the era of dreadful "American Literature" which I found rather dull and not enjoyable. A lot of those works seem to be read solely for the sake of tradition and trying to lend prestige to a rather lackluster early Republic era of homegrown writers.

[crazy canuck]

All of the Dickens we read in school was heavily pared down and condensed, presumably to the detriment of the overall story and flow of things. I know I didn't care for a lot of the readings we had to do in that style at the time but have enjoyed some of the pieces after when I read them in full.

In addition to the abridged classics in High School, it was also the era of dreadful "American Literature" which I found rather dull and not enjoyable. A lot of those works seem to be read solely for the sake of tradition and trying to lend prestige to a rather lackluster early Republic era of homegrown writers.

Yeah, that is how I first encountered Dickens as well.  I don't remember much of American Literature beyond Poe but that is probably because I did not really read it as assigned 

[Sophie Scholl]

As mentioned, Poe also had the benefit of Simpsons (Raven, Tell Tale Heart) and Corman productions/interpretations (The Masque of the Red Death) shown in class to highlight things and as a Halloween time treat.

[Sheilbh]

As mentioned, Poe also had the benefit of Simpsons (Raven, Tell Tale Heart) and Corman productions/interpretations (The Masque of the Red Death) shown in class to highlight things and as a Halloween time treat.

At high school, like Jos we didn't read Dickens or Austen, but we did watch the Gwyneth Paltrow adaptation of Emma and Clueless to look at interpretation/reception which was pretty good - and I still unironically think Clueless is one of the great Austen adaptations

I only actually read any Austen at university.

[crazy canuck]

As mentioned, Poe also had the benefit of Simpsons (Raven, Tell Tale Heart) and Corman productions/interpretations (The Masque of the Red Death) shown in class to highlight things and as a Halloween time treat.

Yes, and Poe had the benefit of Vincent Price being awesome 

[celedhring]

The only reason I ever heard of Lovecraft is because people talked about him here.

I have a very early memory of him. My granddad had an illustrated Lovecraft short story collection that creeped the fuck out of me as a kid.

Then The Call of Cthulhu was one of the first pen-and-paper RPGs released in Spain, when I was in my teens, and I picked it up. It had a very comprehensive guide to the Lovecraft mythos and I read that before I read any actual Lovecraft book.

[celedhring]

I will also point out that The Call of Cthulhu RPG game got a Catalan translation before the actual "Call of Cthulhu" novella did, which is beyond funny.

[Sophie Scholl]

At high school, like Jos we didn't read Dickens or Austen, but we did watch the Gwyneth Paltrow adaptation of Emma and Clueless to look at interpretation/reception which was pretty good - and I still unironically think Clueless is one of the great Austen adaptations

I only actually read any Austen at university.

Baz Luhrman's William Shakespeare's Romeo + Juliet came out right when we read the play as seniors in high school. I didn't see it at the time, but it is now a favorite movie. Our English teacher showed the Zefarelli version in class whereas the other teacher took her classes on a field trip to the Baz version. The (in)famous Olivia Hussey scenes went over about how you'd expect. 10 Things I Hate About You is also a fun modern take from that era. In college we watched the Teymour Titus movie and Nunn's Twelth Night. Both were fantastic in my opinion. I've watched others over the years like Branagh's Henry V and Loncraine's Richard III and I don't think I've encountered a dud yet. In terms of the number of adaptations made over the years and their quality, I don't think there is a better success ratio for source material to screen.

[Sheilbh]

Yeah we got Romeo + Juliet in English and I absolutely loved it - and I still do. I don't even remember reading Romeo and Juliet at high school so it may just have been an end of term film that's vaguely connected to the subject. Like when our history teacher played the Cate Blanchett Elizabeth, heckling historical inaccuracies from the back of the classroom But as you say with Romeo + Juliet, 10 Things I Hate About You, Titus - also Much Ado About Nothing () - I think the mid to late 90s was just a really good time for creative adaptations for some reason

I definitely remember doing Macbeth (15-16), Othello (17) and King Lear (18) - but don't remember watching any adaptations which is odd. We went to see an all male version of A Midsummer Night's Dream at a local theatre (including a gag that Bottom had a massive dick once he was turned into an ass), but that might have been for drama.

I think schools tie what you study to what you could plausibly see. I feel like everyone who went to high school at my age did An Inspector Calls just because there was a touring production. I hope that with live recordings of plays, like National Theatre Live, that basically any play being studied in school is now also accompanied with everyone seeing at least some form of performance of it whether live, recorded play or adaptation because I found it eye-opening as a kid.

[Gups]

I never had Dickens in high school (and I certainly didn't study English in university) so I stayed away from him like the plague.

One summer though I was doing field work, knew I would have a lot of time on my hands, so put together a bit of a "great works" reading list for myself.  One of the books was Tale of Two Cities.  I was really surprised how much I enjoyed it.  I later learned how Dickens really was a popular novelist of the time, making him more of a, I dunno, John Grisham of the mid-19th century.

Dickens is wasted on the young.  Most people I've met who hate him were forced to read him in junior high or high school.

We had to read Great Expectations at school, aged 14 or 15. I loved the Christmas lunch scene and still read Dickens regularly. Funnily enough downloaded Barnaby Rudge this morning as I haven't read that one since my early 20s

[Gups]

Yeah we got Romeo + Juliet in English and I absolutely loved it - and I still do. I don't even remember reading Romeo and Juliet at high school so it may just have been an end of term film that's vaguely connected to the subject. Like when our history teacher played the Cate Blanchett Elizabeth, heckling historical inaccuracies from the back of the classroom But as you say with Romeo + Juliet, 10 Things I Hate About You, Titus - also Much Ado About Nothing () - I think the mid to late 90s was just a really good time for creative adaptations for some reason

I definitely remember doing Macbeth (15-16), Othello (17) and King Lear (18) - but don't remember watching any adaptations which is odd. We went to see an all male version of A Midsummer Night's Dream at a local theatre (including a gag that Bottom had a massive dick once he was turned into an ass), but that might have been for drama.

I think schools tie what you study to what you could plausibly see. I feel like everyone who went to high school at my age did An Inspector Calls just because there was a touring production. I hope that with live recordings of plays, like National Theatre Live, that basically any play being studied in school is now also accompanied with everyone seeing at least some form of performance of it whether live, recorded play or adaptation because I found it eye-opening as a kid.

I also did Inspector Calls but so did my son a few years ago. I think it's just a play that is relatively easy to discuss/write about with a very clear structure.

[Duque de Bragança]

I will also point out that The Call of Cthulhu RPG game got a Catalan translation before the actual "Call of Cthulhu" novella did, which is beyond funny.

The closest item I can think of, not equivalent, is Star Trek the Motion Picture getting screened in French cinemas before TOS got even broadcasted.

[celedhring]

Had a fun discussion with a friend yesterday. Topic was: what was the first "franchise"? Obviously, there are all the ancient myths, which are shared universes, but we were thinking of it in the sense where there's a person or organization that controls the narrative - a keeper of the canon of sorts. As opposed to unrelated authors reusing characters or settings.

Ancient Greek playwrights loved their trilogies (Oresteia, for example), so we left it at that. Dunno if there are better examples, though. We did have a bit of a debate whether Illiad-Odissey constitute a "franchise" by themselves though.

[Admiral Yi]

Homer is what I thought of.

Sherlock Holmes?

[HVC]

Wasn't Gilgamesh separate stories too, or am I misremembering?