TheFizza said:
Well I mean you had to to know who the characters were! Kinda cool seeing them aged up so fast. The film really holds up over all this time. Those were incredible effects for that old a film
The way Hollywood judges these things the film was not a success, that being as it is the film's also an often overlooked treasure!
It was pretty amazing that they even made a sequel series, that being said, and I agree I've seen much-much worse... The thing is, that those worse series I've seen tend not to have the type of money in their production which this series had. If Willow the series had been done by say
NETFLIX, sure the bad writing and the inability to grasp what was great about the movie to translate it to a series might be overlooked. But seriously Willow wasn't even the main character of his own show.
I was extremely disappointed, having watched the movie since childhood, that we barely spent any time with Wil and that the Brownies only show up for like one scene was as frustrating as it was dumb. As for the cast, Amar Chadha-Patel is a fantastic actor who basically had nothing to do and was given terrible dialogue. Tony Revolori really tried but he still felt like he was in a Spider-Man movie and Ruby Cruz just can't act all she does is play herself. Which is fine in some situations. And many a successful actor can spend years making money doing that. Heck, I was fine when she did her thing in Bottoms but here, in a Sword & Sorcery world, it completely breaks the verisimilitude of every scene she appears in. Meanwhile Ellie Bamber is giving it her all, however, she's also acting in an entirely different series altogether.
Mostly everyone else worked and personally I was really impressed at Joanne Whalley, whom I can't help wondering why she was never as big as her romantic lead in the movie, Val Kilmer, because she leaves an impression. But yeah, IMO that's why it didn't succeed. Since, if you do explain the story of the streaming series it sounds pretty decent. It's a shame they couldn't translate it to the small screen in a more enjoyable form for all the production value they invested. But that's just my take!
...This is like me on the wheel of time post. I just cared about the source material too much.
Pretty spot on assessment of all the actors, I very much so agree with Ruby being the lead anchor weighing down the main cast. And I had to look up Joanne Whalley too after watching the first movie because, yeah, she was gorgeous and a good actress.
I hadn't finished the series yet, and I have to agree, we were robbed on the Brownies. I was just watching a VFX interview with Seth Rogan here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKt18K_Sy0I He talks about how studios tend not to want to use 'older' vfx due to concerns over a show looking dated, and since they're very obviously using rotoscope still to acheive the brownies shots I wonder if that's why we didn't see them. I also wonder if the second brownie was alive IRL.
Tony Revolori really only plays the role of clueless idiot well.
I will also agree that Willow is NOT the main character of the show. That's a dual role with him and the Apprentice, story wise. The entire story to me is a 'passing of the torch' sort of story, and repeatedly with the updated dialogue and story direction it feels like they're trying to emphasize the role of the younger crowd in the story. Still haven't finished it, I'm not giving it top marks either, but I would call it 'good'.
Follow us on Facebook|Privacy|About|Contact|Desktop Version
