I read the novel and found this movie "decent/fine/okay/kindafun". But I have just one question... why…
I'll just paste my earlier response to another similar comment.
---
Not really.
Why was the film not good for you? Because there were a lot of changes compared to the source material? And you're thinking if it was a TV series they'll be faithful?
Nope. There's no guarantee of that happening. Take for example the Korean adaptation of Little Women. It was vastly different from the book. It was a TV series.
Another is Shadowhunters. It was a TV series too, and is different from in many places than the book series.
Writers have literary freedom when it comes to adaptations. What is important in an adaptation is the essence of the original work. The Little Women Korean TV adaptation captured that essence well, that's why it is a legitimate adaptation.
The same with this film adaptation.
However, if you're talking about production, still no guarantees. Usually, TV adaptations don't get better editing and CG than films. CG alone is expensive, and TV prods often gets less budget than movies.
Next, the actors will definitely be different. Again, budget constraints.
Because of budget, the TV adaptation might end up with 6–12 episodes only. Which means they have to remove a lot of scenes.
Since it will end up that way anyway, isn't it better to just produce a movie and get a bigger budget?
For a TV adaptation to be better than a film, they need investors who won't back down from the project. They will also need multiple seasons. And we all know how the Korean industry is not a fan of multiple seasons.
A good example is His Dark Materials: 3 seasons with 8 episodes each. It surpassed the film adaptation The Golden Compass.
The TV adaptation was a huge success because the funding came from loyal investors, and it was produced by BBC. Even though there were changes, that's expected in an adaptation, because they were given 24 episodes total, they were able to pack in as many critical scenes as possible, as well as, cast the right actors for each of the characters. Even Philip Pullman was involved on which moments they need to include and how to change the scenes to fit the TV format.
I seriously doubt Korea will get that level of support for a TV adaptation of Omniscient Reader. More likely than not, they'll butcher it. The movie format is the best they can have considering the attitude of Korean investors.
I feel like maybe if it was made into a series it would've been really really good.
Not really.
Why was the film not good for you? Because there were a lot of changes compared to the source material? And you're thinking if it was a TV series they'll be faithful?
Nope. There's no guarantee of that happening. Take for example the Korean adaptation of Little Women. It was vastly different from the book. It was a TV series.
Another is Shadowhunters. It was a TV series too, and is different from in many places than the book series.
Writers have literary freedom when it comes to adaptations. What is important in an adaptation is the essence of the original work. The Little Women Korean TV adaptation captured that essence well, that's why it is a legitimate adaptation.
The same with this film adaptation.
However, if you're talking about production, still no guarantees. Usually, TV adaptations don't get better editing and CG than films. CG alone is expensive, and TV prods often gets less budget than movies.
Next, the actors will definitely be different. Again, budget constraints.
Because of budget, the TV adaptation might end up with 6–12 episodes only. Which means they have to remove a lot of scenes.
Since it will end up that way anyway, isn't it better to just produce a movie and get a bigger budget?
For a TV adaptation to be better than a film, they need investors who won't back down from the project. They will also need multiple seasons. And we all know how the Korean industry is not a fan of multiple seasons.
A good example is His Dark Materials: 3 seasons with 8 episodes each. It surpassed the film adaptation The Golden Compass.
The TV adaptation was a huge success because the funding came from loyal investors, and it was produced by BBC. Even though there were changes, that's expected in an adaptation, because they were given 24 episodes total, they were able to pack in as many critical scenes as possible, as well as, cast the right actors for each of the characters. Even Philip Pullman was involved on which moments they need to include and how to change the scenes to fit the TV format.
I seriously doubt Korea will get that level of support for a TV adaptation of Omniscient Reader. More likely than not, they'll butcher it. The movie format is the best they can have considering the attitude of Korean investors.
justt to tell you ..if you have not read the manhwa yet its good,but if you have alr read it there is no use of…
It is an adaptation, just as Little Women Korean version is an adaptation even though almost everything about it is different.
Adaptation, from the root word "adapt". You adapt a work in a different cultur or medium. Writers have literary freedom to adapt it however they want as long as they got a License to do so (meaning she Copyright holder approved the adaptation).
What is important on an adaptation are not the shaloow things people complain about, it is the essence. The movie, while not perfect, adapted the essence well of the original source material (the novel, not the webtoon). Just as how Little Women did the same. Just as how Shadowhuntert did. Just as how the Lordf the Rings did.
I was mildly curious about this drama and saw the reviews and ... wow, I've never seen so many 1 star reviews…
It's very common for self-confessed "true fans" to always complain about an adaptation. So, you should watch it without relying on what other said.
Even the Lord of the Rings movies received a lot of complaints from "true fans".
The Korean adaptation of Little Women received a lot of complaints from "true fans" (which ironically, these self-confessed fans of she original work many did not evee read it).
The Shadowhunters TV adaptation received a lot of complaints too. One most common complaint was it was "woke". If they are indeed true fans, they would've known that the novels were already that way before "woke" entered people's vocabularies.
"Fans" even complain when a comics/manga/webtoon is adapted into comics/manga/webtoon because the characters don't look the same, the events are different, the locations are localised, and every complaint they can think of. It's a F*** adaptation. That's how adaptation works. From the root word itself: adapt!
I haven't watched it yet but what I've picked up is that people are upset that they didn't stick to the original…
Yesz but the thing most people forget about adaptations of literary works is that the writer can exercise their literary freedom.
Second, and I personally think the most important, what matters in an adaptation is the essence of it, not if the events, characters, etc. were faithful.
Take for example Shadowhunters. People who claimed they are fans of the novels were disappointed because of the many changes they did. When, if they were a true fan, they would've recognised that the adaptation stayed true with the essence of the novels.
Those angry "fans" even accused it of being woke when the novels itself weri already like that before "woke" entered people's vocabulary. They just want to complain because they want the adaptation to be 100% the same.
And that's a TV series. So, even if Omniscient was adapted as a TV series, people will still complain endlessly.
Here's another example: Little Women. The Little Women Korean adaptation (last year or two?) was vastly different from the original novel. People complained, and most that did not even read the novel, LOL.
Oh, it was a TV series adaptation too.
"Fans", if they really are true "fans", will always find something to complain about when it comes to live-action adaptations of literary works. However, you rarely see such attitude if it was an animation adaptation. Even in the Japanese industry, adaptation of a manga, serial, or visual novel, into an anime rarely gets complaints regardless if the anime adaptation was too far from the original.
People just complain a lot whenever it is a live-action adaptation. People complain even with a simple thing as casting an actor who doesn't look like the character. It isn't the looks that is important when casting for a certain character, what truly matters is if the actor can truly act the character's character in question.
Do fans want someone casted because they look very similar to the character but cannot even act that character properly? Or, do they want someone who can act the character even if they don't look like the character?
Which brings us back to what I said earlier: the essence is the most important part when adapting a literary work into another medium, most especially in a medium with a lot of constraints like live-action. And this is what most people are missing. They are only looking at the surface, the shallow stuff. It makes you wonder if they truly understood the original source material or not.
And going back to Omniscient specifically, the webtoon itself is an adaptation. The originau source material of the film was the novel. Yet you'll see "fans" complain about how the castings were wrong because they didn't look like the characters themselves. Obviously hinding they were thinking of the webtoon and not the novel.
Which can be observed in works which were adapted between different cultures. A manga was adapted as a webtoon. A Western comics adapted as a webtoon and as a manga. Peopli complained because the characters look different and some events were different. FCOL, it's an adaptation! That's what an adaptation is! To adapt!
Self-confessed "fans" just like to complain. Many don't really understand the essence of the works they're consuming. They often only see the shallow things. The faces. The names. Will even act like they know how the original author feels and thinks about the adaptation (when the original authors usually were involved or at least was consulted).
1. I'm so glad to see the two reunited since Uncontrollably Fond. 2. I'm glad Suzy no longer is too thin (I mean it well, don't misinterpret). 😆 The one she has on this series is perfect for her. 3. Wow. Ahn EunJin! 4. Go KyuPil is finally anything but a pig animal. 😅
I haven't watched it yet but what I've picked up is that people are upset that they didn't stick to the original…
I've read the webtoon and I still highy approve of the film adaptation.
People just like to complain about every single live-action adaptation ever made. Majority of them don't understand it is not easy to make a screen adaptation of a literary work.
LOL. Just ignore them. It's not like their own homegrown productions aren't guilty of what they're accusing you…
Oh, and did they really watched the entire series? Because if there is someone who should complain here, it is the current President of the United States of America.
The message—if we can call it that—of the show was the USA is the instigator of wars because it benefits them. The USA will bomb anyone anywhere because they feel like doing so, even if they lack actionable intel (hint: 2003 US invasion of Iraq).
It is actually surprising the current US President still hasn't noticed «Tempest» and say anything about it. Or, maybe he did and people around him constantly stopped him.
Seriously, if those who are complaining about how this TV series depicted this and that country actually watched «Tempest» they know the USA had the worst depiction.
Let's not forget, when Hollywood paints other countries in a negative light, no one complains about it, or at least they don't make efforts to be noticed. But if it was done by an Asian, people complain (Asians against Asians at that) and they make sure they are noticed.
Clearly double-standards. More likely political or backed by those with political interests.
LOL. Just ignore them. It's not like their own homegrown productions aren't guilty of what they're accusing you about.
It is fiction. In fiction, it is called alternate history. The way things unfolded in your fiction world unfolded that way because its history is different from the real world. Alternate history is an ancient genre in fiction.
Take for example the work entitled, «Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter». Scholars cringed when the book was released, and again when the film adaptation premiered. People will always find reasons to complain about (though it's questionable how much of their being is really into it, or to put it another, if they really are 100% into it and not simply fired up by someone's eloquent piece on why they should complain).
Fiction is fiction. Period. Even my own people complained about Dan Brown's description of Manila in «Inferno» being “The Gates of Hell” and I stood against that complaint. It's fiction.
It is when fiction is presented as fact that we should complain. Because then it is wrong and obviously an attempt to whitewash. One such example was the animated film «Elcano & Magellan». It was presented as a historical adaptation, not as fiction. It was no longer about artistic freedom. Yes, it was "history through their own lens" but they never presented it that way, they presented it as fact. Now that's clearly trying to push a colonialist narrative.
«Tempest» clearly stated it is fiction. It was never presented as fact. In other words, it is within the realms of alternate history fiction. That qualifies you to use your artistic freedom to tell the story of this world that was shaped differently because its past unfolded differently from the real world. Anyone complaining about it simply don't understand what fiction is or lacks the capacity to properly analyse works of art.
For a Disney production with plenty of veteran North American actors, they really placed the USA in a very bad light. 😆😆😆😆
"The US always bomb people in other nations if they want, wny can't I?"
Basically, it's all about how the US is the instigator of war and hardship anywhere in the world. There really are serious accusations North American companies backed by people in power in the USA are indeed the suppliers of weapons. The writers really used that big time.and made it real.
It's surprising the curreet US President hasn't blocked the show yet. 🤣🤣🤣🤣
I think that Shin's Project is unfortunately the type of kdrama that is loved by Koreans but overlooked by international…
Don't worry, it's very popular here in the Philippines, the largest foreign market for Korean entertainment according to Korean news reports. MDL is not popular in the Philippines, and most Filipinos rarely care about leaving ratings in various sites. 😆
Wow. They are prepping up and transitioning IRe to a mature look. It appears that they're getting ready to give her romantic roles and make her the next Queen of Romance.
It's called a marriage of convenience and it is actually common in many countries. 🤪 It just is not talked about by couples because it violates the spirit of marriage and the Constitution. If the State finds solid proof, they might get into a State vs Couple situation and that will definitely become very ugly.
1 
---
Not really.
Why was the film not good for you? Because there were a lot of changes compared to the source material? And you're thinking if it was a TV series they'll be faithful?
Nope. There's no guarantee of that happening. Take for example the Korean adaptation of Little Women. It was vastly different from the book. It was a TV series.
Another is Shadowhunters. It was a TV series too, and is different from in many places than the book series.
Writers have literary freedom when it comes to adaptations. What is important in an adaptation is the essence of the original work. The Little Women Korean TV adaptation captured that essence well, that's why it is a legitimate adaptation.
The same with this film adaptation.
However, if you're talking about production, still no guarantees. Usually, TV adaptations don't get better editing and CG than films. CG alone is expensive, and TV prods often gets less budget than movies.
Next, the actors will definitely be different. Again, budget constraints.
Because of budget, the TV adaptation might end up with 6–12 episodes only. Which means they have to remove a lot of scenes.
Since it will end up that way anyway, isn't it better to just produce a movie and get a bigger budget?
For a TV adaptation to be better than a film, they need investors who won't back down from the project. They will also need multiple seasons. And we all know how the Korean industry is not a fan of multiple seasons.
A good example is His Dark Materials: 3 seasons with 8 episodes each. It surpassed the film adaptation The Golden Compass.
The TV adaptation was a huge success because the funding came from loyal investors, and it was produced by BBC. Even though there were changes, that's expected in an adaptation, because they were given 24 episodes total, they were able to pack in as many critical scenes as possible, as well as, cast the right actors for each of the characters. Even Philip Pullman was involved on which moments they need to include and how to change the scenes to fit the TV format.
I seriously doubt Korea will get that level of support for a TV adaptation of Omniscient Reader. More likely than not, they'll butcher it. The movie format is the best they can have considering the attitude of Korean investors.
Why was the film not good for you? Because there were a lot of changes compared to the source material? And you're thinking if it was a TV series they'll be faithful?
Nope. There's no guarantee of that happening. Take for example the Korean adaptation of Little Women. It was vastly different from the book. It was a TV series.
Another is Shadowhunters. It was a TV series too, and is different from in many places than the book series.
Writers have literary freedom when it comes to adaptations. What is important in an adaptation is the essence of the original work. The Little Women Korean TV adaptation captured that essence well, that's why it is a legitimate adaptation.
The same with this film adaptation.
However, if you're talking about production, still no guarantees. Usually, TV adaptations don't get better editing and CG than films. CG alone is expensive, and TV prods often gets less budget than movies.
Next, the actors will definitely be different. Again, budget constraints.
Because of budget, the TV adaptation might end up with 6–12 episodes only. Which means they have to remove a lot of scenes.
Since it will end up that way anyway, isn't it better to just produce a movie and get a bigger budget?
For a TV adaptation to be better than a film, they need investors who won't back down from the project. They will also need multiple seasons. And we all know how the Korean industry is not a fan of multiple seasons.
A good example is His Dark Materials: 3 seasons with 8 episodes each. It surpassed the film adaptation The Golden Compass.
The TV adaptation was a huge success because the funding came from loyal investors, and it was produced by BBC. Even though there were changes, that's expected in an adaptation, because they were given 24 episodes total, they were able to pack in as many critical scenes as possible, as well as, cast the right actors for each of the characters. Even Philip Pullman was involved on which moments they need to include and how to change the scenes to fit the TV format.
I seriously doubt Korea will get that level of support for a TV adaptation of Omniscient Reader. More likely than not, they'll butcher it. The movie format is the best they can have considering the attitude of Korean investors.
Adaptation, from the root word "adapt". You adapt a work in a different cultur or medium. Writers have literary freedom to adapt it however they want as long as they got a License to do so (meaning she Copyright holder approved the adaptation).
What is important on an adaptation are not the shaloow things people complain about, it is the essence. The movie, while not perfect, adapted the essence well of the original source material (the novel, not the webtoon). Just as how Little Women did the same. Just as how Shadowhuntert did. Just as how the Lordf the Rings did.
Even the Lord of the Rings movies received a lot of complaints from "true fans".
The Korean adaptation of Little Women received a lot of complaints from "true fans" (which ironically, these self-confessed fans of she original work many did not evee read it).
The Shadowhunters TV adaptation received a lot of complaints too. One most common complaint was it was "woke". If they are indeed true fans, they would've known that the novels were already that way before "woke" entered people's vocabularies.
"Fans" even complain when a comics/manga/webtoon is adapted into comics/manga/webtoon because the characters don't look the same, the events are different, the locations are localised, and every complaint they can think of. It's a F*** adaptation. That's how adaptation works. From the root word itself: adapt!
Second, and I personally think the most important, what matters in an adaptation is the essence of it, not if the events, characters, etc. were faithful.
Take for example Shadowhunters. People who claimed they are fans of the novels were disappointed because of the many changes they did. When, if they were a true fan, they would've recognised that the adaptation stayed true with the essence of the novels.
Those angry "fans" even accused it of being woke when the novels itself weri already like that before "woke" entered people's vocabulary. They just want to complain because they want the adaptation to be 100% the same.
And that's a TV series. So, even if Omniscient was adapted as a TV series, people will still complain endlessly.
Here's another example: Little Women. The Little Women Korean adaptation (last year or two?) was vastly different from the original novel. People complained, and most that did not even read the novel, LOL.
Oh, it was a TV series adaptation too.
"Fans", if they really are true "fans", will always find something to complain about when it comes to live-action adaptations of literary works. However, you rarely see such attitude if it was an animation adaptation. Even in the Japanese industry, adaptation of a manga, serial, or visual novel, into an anime rarely gets complaints regardless if the anime adaptation was too far from the original.
People just complain a lot whenever it is a live-action adaptation. People complain even with a simple thing as casting an actor who doesn't look like the character. It isn't the looks that is important when casting for a certain character, what truly matters is if the actor can truly act the character's character in question.
Do fans want someone casted because they look very similar to the character but cannot even act that character properly? Or, do they want someone who can act the character even if they don't look like the character?
Which brings us back to what I said earlier: the essence is the most important part when adapting a literary work into another medium, most especially in a medium with a lot of constraints like live-action. And this is what most people are missing. They are only looking at the surface, the shallow stuff. It makes you wonder if they truly understood the original source material or not.
And going back to Omniscient specifically, the webtoon itself is an adaptation. The originau source material of the film was the novel. Yet you'll see "fans" complain about how the castings were wrong because they didn't look like the characters themselves. Obviously hinding they were thinking of the webtoon and not the novel.
Which can be observed in works which were adapted between different cultures. A manga was adapted as a webtoon. A Western comics adapted as a webtoon and as a manga. Peopli complained because the characters look different and some events were different. FCOL, it's an adaptation! That's what an adaptation is! To adapt!
Self-confessed "fans" just like to complain. Many don't really understand the essence of the works they're consuming. They often only see the shallow things. The faces. The names. Will even act like they know how the original author feels and thinks about the adaptation (when the original authors usually were involved or at least was consulted).
2. I'm glad Suzy no longer is too thin (I mean it well, don't misinterpret). 😆 The one she has on this series is perfect for her.
3. Wow. Ahn EunJin!
4. Go KyuPil is finally anything but a pig animal. 😅
People just like to complain about every single live-action adaptation ever made. Majority of them don't understand it is not easy to make a screen adaptation of a literary work.
The message—if we can call it that—of the show was the USA is the instigator of wars because it benefits them. The USA will bomb anyone anywhere because they feel like doing so, even if they lack actionable intel (hint: 2003 US invasion of Iraq).
It is actually surprising the current US President still hasn't noticed «Tempest» and say anything about it. Or, maybe he did and people around him constantly stopped him.
Seriously, if those who are complaining about how this TV series depicted this and that country actually watched «Tempest» they know the USA had the worst depiction.
Let's not forget, when Hollywood paints other countries in a negative light, no one complains about it, or at least they don't make efforts to be noticed. But if it was done by an Asian, people complain (Asians against Asians at that) and they make sure they are noticed.
Clearly double-standards. More likely political or backed by those with political interests.
It is fiction. In fiction, it is called alternate history. The way things unfolded in your fiction world unfolded that way because its history is different from the real world. Alternate history is an ancient genre in fiction.
Take for example the work entitled, «Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter». Scholars cringed when the book was released, and again when the film adaptation premiered. People will always find reasons to complain about (though it's questionable how much of their being is really into it, or to put it another, if they really are 100% into it and not simply fired up by someone's eloquent piece on why they should complain).
Fiction is fiction. Period. Even my own people complained about Dan Brown's description of Manila in «Inferno» being “The Gates of Hell” and I stood against that complaint. It's fiction.
It is when fiction is presented as fact that we should complain. Because then it is wrong and obviously an attempt to whitewash. One such example was the animated film «Elcano & Magellan». It was presented as a historical adaptation, not as fiction. It was no longer about artistic freedom. Yes, it was "history through their own lens" but they never presented it that way, they presented it as fact. Now that's clearly trying to push a colonialist narrative.
«Tempest» clearly stated it is fiction. It was never presented as fact. In other words, it is within the realms of alternate history fiction. That qualifies you to use your artistic freedom to tell the story of this world that was shaped differently because its past unfolded differently from the real world. Anyone complaining about it simply don't understand what fiction is or lacks the capacity to properly analyse works of art.
"The US always bomb people in other nations if they want, wny can't I?"
Basically, it's all about how the US is the instigator of war and hardship anywhere in the world. There really are serious accusations North American companies backed by people in power in the USA are indeed the suppliers of weapons. The writers really used that big time.and made it real.
It's surprising the curreet US President hasn't blocked the show yet. 🤣🤣🤣🤣
I can't wait for her future projects in the romance genre. The teaser they gave us was very promising for her.