Will there be a new season? ?!
It's so disappointing when they end a perfectly good TV series without a word about it, that I could find anyway!?
shareIt's so disappointing when they end a perfectly good TV series without a word about it, that I could find anyway!?
shareGood grief. Are you guys going to be running on about a new season for this show for the next ten years?
It was cancelled. Everyone involved has moved on to new projects. The chances of there being a new season is somewhere between slim and none. I'm genuinely sorry for the people who loved it so much, but spamming the IMDB message boards about it WON'T CHANGE ANYTHING.
_____
Strip away the phony tinsel of Hollywood and you find the real tinsel underneath.
Well the show was well done, way better than most of the junk out there
sharealaskanandie (Mon Dec 7 2015 09:03:38)
It's so disappointing when they end a perfectly good TV series without a word about it, that I could find anyway!?
I see you're still slandering people and claiming that they are nothing more than alternate identities on no more basis than that they edited a post or two to correct a misspelling. I see that you are still also unable to distinguish between legitimate, reasoned criticism and mindless bashing. I see that you also are still assuming that all criticisms are based solely on how faithful the series adaptation is to the original novel. You are wrong on all points.
I don't care how much a movie or television series departs from a book, so long as those departures improve the work or at least don't detract from it. I never posted anything about this series until after it was off the air. I do not have any other accounts on IMDb.
Your mindless fangurl support of this gorgeous, sumptuous, but flawed show is simply mind-boggling to me, as is your paranoid insistence that absolutely everyone who posts a criticism about it simply must be an alternate account for your arch-nemesis on IMDb.
_____
Strip away the phony tinsel of Hollywood and you find the real tinsel underneath.
Hecate-3 Fri Jan 15 2016 11:20:14
I see you're still slandering people and claiming that they are nothing more than alternate identities on no more basis than that they edited a post or two to correct a misspelling. I see that you are still also unable to distinguish between legitimate, reasoned criticism and mindless bashing. I see that you also are still assuming that all criticisms are based solely on how faithful the series adaptation is to the original novel. You are wrong on all points.
I don't care how much a movie or television series departs from a book, so long as those departures improve the work or at least don't detract from it. I never posted anything about this series until after it was off the air. I do not have any other accounts on IMDb.
Your mindless fangurl support of this gorgeous, sumptuous, but flawed show is simply mind-boggling to me, as is your paranoid insistence that absolutely everyone who posts a criticism about it simply must be an alternate account for your arch-nemesis on IMDb.
_____
Strip away the phony tinsel of Hollywood and you find the real tinsel underneath.
A Penny Dreadful/Once Upon a Time domain? I didn't like Penny Dreadful much more than I liked this show. Once Upon a Time was cute, but I never made it to the second season. I certainly didn't love it enough to register a domain or set up a website for it. But if you're going to complain about people who don't like this show posting on the IMDB forums dedicated to discussing the show as if only people who loved it are allowed to post, you've got a lot of nerve admitting that you went onto someone's fansite just to stir up trouble. IMDB is not a fansite; it's a site for film critique, which means both the good AND bad things about a film.
The last time I tried to talk to you, I never got the feeling that you ever made any effort to understand anything that I said, and eventually, your replies to my reasoning turned into wholesale quotes of my posts with no additions of your own other than a flippant, irrelevant comment that made no sense at all tacked onto the end. So I’m not sure why I’m bothering to give you another chance, but here goes.
I don’t care how much a film (movie or television) adaptation of Dracula changes the original source material. I probably should care, but I don’t. Sorry, CountVlad. I run the risk of getting a lot of flak and hate for this, but I don’t care because I consider Bram Stoker’s original novel to be mediocre pulp fiction that’s mildly entertaining at best. Sorry again, CountVlad, but that’s my honest opinion. I read the book once and have never felt an impulse to return to it. So, TaraDS … do you still believe that I’m a Draculaphile who dislikes the show solely because it isn’t slavishly faithful to the original novel? Do you still believe that I'm CountVlad?
I believe that CountVlad understands as well as I do that when a novel is translated to film, it is almost inevitable that changes will be made. They are two different mediums. Things that work well in the written word can’t always be directly translated into audio/visuals. So long as changes are necessary or beneficial to the story, reasonable people will accept them.
Just the same, I understand CountVlad’s point. If a filmmaker takes a novel and starts putting it on film, but he changes the story so drastically that it is nothing like the original story, and he changes the personalities of the original characters so much that you only know who they were originally by their names, and he completely changes the tone of the work, and he completely changes the themes of the work, it’s no longer the same work in any way. That’s not a translation to a different medium; that’s a complete rewrite. That’s not an adaptation; that’s a completely new work that was only inspired by the original, not based on it.
There’s nothing wrong with reimagining and rewriting a story, even a beloved classic. The end result can be a quality work in its own right. Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice is a reimagining of the Cinderella story. But if the author is going to write a brand new work, I have to question why he would choose to keep the title and character names from the original source material that was his inspiration, because it looks like nothing more than an attempt to ride on a more famous author’s coattails and cash in on the success of his world famous title. And that’s something I can’t respect. Especially for a potboiler.
But that’s merely what I think CountVlad has been trying to explain to you. For my part, I dislike the show because Jonathan Rhys-Meyers seemed to be phoning in his performance (I know he can do better work because I’ve seen him do it.), because the characters and dialogue were hackneyed and cliche, and because the characters kept acting like absolute idiots for no better reason than that the writers couldn’t think up any other way to get everyone to the next plot beat. If the changes had been improvements, I wouldn’t have cared how many had been made, but as mediocre as I consider Bram Stoker’s Dracula to be, it was better writing than I saw in this television series. And I would hate these things about the television series even if it had no connection to any novel whatsoever.
So disagree with me about my assessment of the show if you must, but please quit pretending that everyone who dislikes this show does so only because it deviates from the novel. That’s just dishonest on your part.
_____
Strip away the phony tinsel of Hollywood and you find the real tinsel underneath.
PS: CountVlad said he picked his ID because he loves Dracula and all things vampire. I've already expressed my opinion of Bram Stoker's novel, but it's worth mentioning that I'm also far from being a vampire aficionado. To date, I have seen exactly ONE vampire movie that I thought was good; I have read exactly ONE vampire novel that I thought was good. They were unrelated to each other in case you were interested.
But although CountVlad seems like a reasonable guy the few times I have encountered him, I don't know anyone on IMDB well enough to consider him or her a friend. Establishing a friendship with me takes a little more than just sharing a few comments with someone about a television show on the Internet.
AND THIS IS MY *ONLY* IMDB ACCOUNT. I don't have time to waste on alternate accounts.
_____
Strip away the phony tinsel of Hollywood and you find the real tinsel underneath.
Hecate-3 (Thu Mar 3 2016 20:49:57)
A Penny Dreadful/Once Upon a Time domain? I didn't like Penny Dreadful much more than I liked this show. Once Upon a Time was cute, but I never made it to the second season. I certainly didn't love it enough to register a domain or set up a website for it. But if you're going to complain about people who don't like this show posting on the IMDB forums dedicated to discussing the show as if only people who loved it are allowed to post, you've got a lot of nerve admitting that you went onto someone's fansite just to stir up trouble. IMDB is not a fansite; it's a site for film critique, which means both the good AND bad things about a film.
The last time I tried to talk to you, I never got the feeling that you ever made any effort to understand anything that I said, and eventually, your replies to my reasoning turned into wholesale quotes of my posts with no additions of your own other than a flippant, irrelevant comment that made no sense at all tacked onto the end. So I’m not sure why I’m bothering to give you another chance, but here goes.
I don’t care how much a film (movie or television) adaptation of Dracula changes the original source material. I probably should care, but I don’t. Sorry, CountVlad. I run the risk of getting a lot of flak and hate for this, but I don’t care because I consider Bram Stoker’s original novel to be mediocre pulp fiction that’s mildly entertaining at best. Sorry again, CountVlad, but that’s my honest opinion. I read the book once and have never felt an impulse to return to it. So, TaraDS … do you still believe that I’m a Draculaphile who dislikes the show solely because it isn’t slavishly faithful to the original novel? Do you still believe that I'm CountVlad?
I believe that CountVlad understands as well as I do that when a novel is translated to film, it is almost inevitable that changes will be made. They are two different mediums. Things that work well in the written word can’t always be directly translated into audio/visuals. So long as changes are necessary or beneficial to the story, reasonable people will accept them.
Just the same, I understand CountVlad’s point. If a filmmaker takes a novel and starts putting it on film, but he changes the story so drastically that it is nothing like the original story, and he changes the personalities of the original characters so much that you only know who they were originally by their names, and he completely changes the tone of the work, and he completely changes the themes of the work, it’s no longer the same work in any way. That’s not a translation to a different medium; that’s a complete rewrite. That’s not an adaptation; that’s a completely new work that was only inspired by the original, not based on it.
There’s nothing wrong with reimagining and rewriting a story, even a beloved classic. The end result can be a quality work in its own right. Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice is a reimagining of the Cinderella story. But if the author is going to write a brand new work, I have to question why he would choose to keep the title and character names from the original source material that was his inspiration, because it looks like nothing more than an attempt to ride on a more famous author’s coattails and cash in on the success of his world famous title. And that’s something I can’t respect. Especially for a potboiler.
But that’s merely what I think CountVlad has been trying to explain to you. For my part, I dislike the show because Jonathan Rhys-Meyers seemed to be phoning in his performance (I know he can do better work because I’ve seen him do it.), because the characters and dialogue were hackneyed and cliche, and because the characters kept acting like absolute idiots for no better reason than that the writers couldn’t think up any other way to get everyone to the next plot beat. If the changes had been improvements, I wouldn’t have cared how many had been made, but as mediocre as I consider Bram Stoker’s Dracula to be, it was better writing than I saw in this television series. And I would hate these things about the television series even if it had no connection to any novel whatsoever.
So disagree with me about my assessment of the show if you must, but please quit pretending that everyone who dislikes this show does so only because it deviates from the novel. That’s just dishonest on your part.
_____
Strip away the phony tinsel of Hollywood and you find the real tinsel underneath.
Hecate-3 (Thu Mar 3 2016 21:16:23)
PS: CountVlad said he picked his ID because he loves Dracula and all things vampire. I've already expressed my opinion of Bram Stoker's novel, but it's worth mentioning that I'm also far from being a vampire aficionado. To date, I have seen exactly ONE vampire movie that I thought was good; I have read exactly ONE vampire novel that I thought was good. They were unrelated to each other in case you were interested.
But although CountVlad seems like a reasonable guy the few times I have encountered him, I don't know anyone on IMDB well enough to consider him or her a friend. Establishing a friendship with me takes a little more than just sharing a few comments with someone about a television show on the Internet.
AND THIS IS MY *ONLY* IMDB ACCOUNT. I don't have time to waste on alternate accounts.
_____
Strip away the phony tinsel of Hollywood and you find the real tinsel underneath.
It's so nice how you try to explain what CountVladdy tried to explain.
Rhabarber, Rhabarber, Rhabarber.
Hecate-3 (Mon Mar 7 2016 09:25:42)
"It's so nice how you try to explain what CountVladdy tried to explain."
What can I say, TaraDS? That's one of the differences between the two of us: I actually read other people's comments and make an effort to understand their point of view. If you tried that now and then, you might have something more meaningful to say than:
"Rhabarber, Rhabarber, Rhabarber."
Your insistence in believing - against all evidence - that the ONLY reason anyone might not like your favorite television series simply MUST be because unreasonable people are book purists who can't bear to have a movie adaptation change anything whatsoever about a book is far from an original argument.
That's exactly what everyone says who likes an inferior film adaptation of a book but can't explain why and can't hold his own against the people who can see the flaws in what he likes so much. And because the people who like these inferior film adaptations almost never have the honesty to stand up and say "I know it isn't that great a work, but I really like it anyway." they fall back on accusing people of hating the film adaptation just because it departs from the books, no matter how obvious it has been made that this is not the case.
You could probably cut and paste your "arguments" against people like CountVlad and me from about half the listings on IMDB that are for film adaptations of books without needing to change a single word. The fact that this doesn't tell you anything just goes to show how much of a waste of time it really is to try to talk to you.
So let's remove the temptation to waste time trying to reach someone who is bound and determined not to hear or understand anything said by anyone who doesn't just adore her favorite television show.
MUTED.
Now run along and spam the message boards endlessly with your ridiculous petition in your doomed effort to revive a television show that died years ago and isn't going to be resurrected, even if it is about the undead.
PS: My signature is a paraphrase of a statement made by a journalist that led to Hollywood's nickname of "Tinseltown". I felt comfortable using a paraphrase without the attribution that I would have included if space had permitted because there is question about who said it originally.
But it also says a lot about what kind of person you are, that you ignored virtually every point I made in my post and then tried to mock my signature line in order to divert attention from that. Low blow.
_____
Strip away the phony tinsel of Hollywood and you find the real tinsel underneath.
I think the chances of a revival of Firefly is far more likely than a second season of this show.
shareyes and this is why
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2296682/board/thread/252111079
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3085247/Troubled-star-Jonathan-Rhys-Meyers-looks-worse-wear-disorientated-s-pictured-drinking-bottle-vodka-London-street.html
That might be one reason, but it's not the only one.
_____
Strip away the phony tinsel of Hollywood and you find the real tinsel underneath.
Well done for posting a link from 2015 in 2016.
share