Hello! My name is Brooke. I'm an orphan who got adopted by one of the most wonderful person in the world.
My adopted mother is named Harmony. My adopted father is Finch, though I only get to see him around Winter and Summer breaks. He lives in a cave outside the city while we live in a small town.
I myself am just like everyone else. I do well in school, I have two awesome friends. And I have a crush on the hottest guy in school. Kind of embarressing. Er... you weren't supposed to read that.
Aside from that, there's not much in my life.
And I'm her Gaurdian, Harmony. I'm an angel, sort of leading a double-life. It's kind of exciting. I'll be watching over from time to time!
I run my own Flower Shop and I'm married to a devil. But he's nicer than he lets on! Finch, you're so silly!
The only problem being that films are so expensive these days that they require backing, and backing comes from assuring producers that your product will make money. If your product isn't projected to appeal to enough people, you can't get funding. The system will need to change drastically before you'll be able to undo anything, I'm afraid. But you can always petition for change in some way.
Long story short: This is one of the manifold reasons why I'm not the biggest fan of capitalism. emotion_donotwant
It's annoying as s**t, bro! They did it in The Importance of Being Earnest, which I hated; and I KNOW they did it with The Picture of Dorian Gray, as I've been told, but I've not actually seen it.
Salome's Last Dance did the framing and making of something edgier fine because it wasn't trying to be popular, either; it was quirky in its own way, and oversexed simply because the play itself was already somewhat sexual and the director wanted to take it super far. In the films I mentioned before, however... it's clear they were just trying to appeal to a modern audience with stupid s**t. Can't abide that. (Particularly not The Picture of Dorian Gray, in which they SHOWED DORIAN'S SINS, negating the entire purpose of what WAS Dorian's secret life in the novel....)
As I say, I just always worry about additional material that's added to stuff I like; in the past, it's almost always been kinda dumb and taken away from the spirit of the work. At least with Victorian pieces. It seems to me that people who adapt these works have the tendency to try to write 'edgy' stuff-- references and anachronisms and the like-- into older literature, as though it needs it to relate to a modern audience. BUT IT DOESN'T. PEOPLE WOULDN'T STILL LAUD THESE AUTHORS IF THEY DID. emotion_donotwant
I just want it to be a good film. I mean, I love the story that it's based off of, but it's not a very long story, which means there will be new material written for it. And will that material be in the spirit of Wilde/not be really dumb? I dunno. I certainly hope not, but... we shan't know until we see it.gonk