Goosebumps two movie versions made in 15 years and 18 years, how can I say, letting the original author into the story really is an open practice. Compared to the "monsters" of the original book being assembled to make a movie, Stan's re-creation of a story, introducing the protagonist and the supernatural story, and narrating the protagonist's process and ending from daily to non-daily, is already very original. The first part focused on shaping the image of RL Stein, the original author, and portraying monsters as brainless villains, which is actually a bit disappointing. Although there are absolute evil forces in the original work, such as Slappy, it is well restored, but more stories are ghost stories than monster stories. Maybe there are no concrete ghosts and monsters, but there will be one that can open the story. Objects, such as the old photos of the supernatural school. The protagonist finds himself fading after entering the old black and white photos 50 years ago. This setting is really fascinating; perhaps it is a script that was accidentally caused by a stage accident in the ghost of the auditorium decades ago. The ghost of the dead returned to the stage because of obsession with the script, and became a harmless new classmate of the protagonist. I like these two books very much, because what is supernatural is a story and an experience, as unknown as the protagonist, and explores with the protagonist. The protagonist is the kind, justice and brave middle school students who have different personalities. There are boys and girls. It is the partners who accompany them to take risks without hesitation. The first-person perspective of the original book allows readers to better substitute, giving us an opportunity to escape from daily life, forget real life, and enter the world of fantasy. It is the protagonist and the story that are the hallmarks of the original work, not the labelled monsters. When the werewolf appeared in the movie, I was surprised to see canvas shoes broken by the legs of the wolf, because it restored the process of the original protagonist from a man to a werewolf. In the setting, the werewolf turned into a wolf at night, and the ability of a full moon night was enhanced. , But he is essentially human, and his heart is also very tangled and struggling. When I watched the movie, I always had expectations that he could understand after interacting with the werewolf, but in the end it didn’t. The same was true for other monsters, like the toolmen who were pulled out to assemble the villain. I saw the original from them. The stalks and stories are too limited, this is the place where the movie "Wonderful Night in Museum" is not as good as Wonderful Night. I don’t know if the second part draws on experience, but allows the protagonists to move on their own. The daily routine and the opportunity to enter the story in the first half are very Stan’s taste. The protagonist discovers and abandons the protagonists of Slappi and the original puppet series. The behavior is exactly the same. In the second half of the Halloween, the scene is too big, and the movie-like special effects are very cool, but it lacks the characteristics of the original scenes that are short and sharp. The original scenes are usually in the woods around schools and homes. The scenes are small but the stage is large. When I watched these scenes, they were too daily and substitutable. Fear, this is also the essence of goose bumps as a family horror adventure series. In short, these two films are not satisfactory. The first one is a success as a collection of monsters that evokes a wave of original works, but if you want to read the story, you have to read the second one, but the second one cannot avoid the routine of the first one. ——Seal the monsters with books. This is not the method that the protagonists of the original book will use. The protagonists of the puppet series usually force the puppets to be physically sealed, and finally think that they are solved, but they just pass the puppets to the next victim family , The horror lasts forever and never ends. I know that the introduction of the role of the original author and the use of books to attract the monsters are easy to arouse the feelings of the original readers, but this is a departure from the practice of the original story that is king. , Strong integrity, has its own unique style. So it's better to write a new story. There is no original manuscript in this world, and the world view is the same as the normal world. Even if the last story is actually a book, the monster can escape the manuscript and continue the horror. ——Looking at the third part of the script, I have already written it. I wrote a Stan-style story. The protagonists finally solved the incident with their ingenuity, but found out that they were just characters in the book. The monster was released and the protagonist started. Find a way to connect with the world outside the book (Blahblah may connect with Stan again, maybe). This not only connects the worldviews of the first two parts, but also returns the focus to the story. In the end, there is an unexpected ending without the needle. In the story, the protagonists finally solved the incident with their ingenuity, but found that they were just characters in the book. The monster was released. The protagonist began to find a way to connect with the world outside the book. ). This not only connects the worldviews of the first two parts, but also returns the focus to the story. In the end, there is an unexpected ending without the needle. In the story, the protagonists finally solved the incident by virtue of their ingenuity, but found that they were just characters in the book. The monster was released. The protagonist began to find a way to connect with the world outside the book. (Blahblah may contact Stan again. ). This not only connects the worldviews of the first two parts, but also returns the focus to the story. In the end, there is an unexpected ending without the needle.
View more about Goosebumps reviews
