is there life on mars?
Oct. 23rd, 2008 07:38 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Gah.
Had a fit of masochism and decided to watch the first episode of the US remake of Life on Mars, just to see what they'd done with it. And, um...well. The less said the better, really.
I think the biggest problem it had was that it wasn't sure what it wanted to be, a faithful copy of the original or its own story, and ended up falling down somewhere between the two. So that although it is almost scene-by-scene identical for large chunks of the episode, right down to dialogue and direction...it also over-simplifies the plot tremendously. You could argue that this is because the story has to be compressed into a much shorter airing time, 60 minutes reduced to 40...but they also veered off on rather a major, time-consuming tangent all of their own as a result of the plot changes, sacrificing characterisation for action. There was none of the polish and finesse of the original, and certainly none of the charisma. Where every single character in the original is bursting with personality and individuality right from the first moment, the characters here are almost uniformly bland. Even Gene, incredibly enough considering what an important character he is for the original - in this he made barely any impression at all!
Bland, in fact, is the best word to describe the episode - and probably the last word anyone would use to describe the original, which was so vibrant and eye-catching and had such instant impact.
Bleurgh. Well, I wanted to see what they've done with it, and now I know. They have butchered it. I think I'll just stick with the original, thanks all the same!
Had a fit of masochism and decided to watch the first episode of the US remake of Life on Mars, just to see what they'd done with it. And, um...well. The less said the better, really.
I think the biggest problem it had was that it wasn't sure what it wanted to be, a faithful copy of the original or its own story, and ended up falling down somewhere between the two. So that although it is almost scene-by-scene identical for large chunks of the episode, right down to dialogue and direction...it also over-simplifies the plot tremendously. You could argue that this is because the story has to be compressed into a much shorter airing time, 60 minutes reduced to 40...but they also veered off on rather a major, time-consuming tangent all of their own as a result of the plot changes, sacrificing characterisation for action. There was none of the polish and finesse of the original, and certainly none of the charisma. Where every single character in the original is bursting with personality and individuality right from the first moment, the characters here are almost uniformly bland. Even Gene, incredibly enough considering what an important character he is for the original - in this he made barely any impression at all!
Bland, in fact, is the best word to describe the episode - and probably the last word anyone would use to describe the original, which was so vibrant and eye-catching and had such instant impact.
Bleurgh. Well, I wanted to see what they've done with it, and now I know. They have butchered it. I think I'll just stick with the original, thanks all the same!
no subject
Date: 2008-10-23 07:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-23 07:46 pm (UTC)I'm assuming, though, that they will have to find at least some ideas of their own at some point, depending on how long the season is supposed to run, given that the original has only eight stories in each season!
no subject
Date: 2008-10-23 08:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-23 07:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-23 07:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-23 08:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-24 07:23 am (UTC)I mean...it wasn't bad. Just tremendously bland compared to the life and colour and vivacity of the original. It felt as if the makers somehow hadn't grasped the whole point of the original, which was the intense psychological trip, and instead were trying to turn it into a serious police drama, and the result was this weird mishmash. And the characters! Might as well have been blocks of wood most of the time.
*sigh*
no subject
Date: 2008-10-24 07:24 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-23 08:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-24 07:23 am (UTC)I wanted to watch that first episode, though, just so I'd know. And now I do and need never watch again!
no subject
Date: 2008-10-23 09:40 pm (UTC)I haven't seen anyone else comment either way on the US version (yet), but I don't think there have been any US remakes of UK shows that have really impressed British fans so I'm not really expecting much of this one either. Besides, I'm barely finding time to keep up with the shows I'm already interested in without looking for any more right now. ;)
no subject
Date: 2008-10-24 07:28 am (UTC)I've only seen one person on my flist comment on the US version, and they hadn't seen the UK version either and were just terribly confused. Having seen what the US showmakers have done with it, I'm not surprised - they totally emphasised the case and action at the expense of the characters and of the mystery and intrigue that need to infuse the show for it to have its true impact and meaning. I'm not sure they actually get the point of it at all, just saw its success and wanted to cash in. You can see where they have tried to copy all the major iconic moments...but totally rushed them, and thus completely robbed them of even half the impact of the original. There's no life, no colour, no vivacity. Just bland all the way.
I never had any intention of watching it as an ongoing thing - like you, I struggle for time and so limit my show watching - but I was curious to see just this one episode to get a feel for what they were doing with it. And now I know I definitely need never watch again!
no subject
Date: 2008-10-23 10:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-10-24 07:31 am (UTC)Man, re-makes just never work, do they?