|
Post by Ivyfalcon on May 2, 2021 19:04:31 GMT -5
Mainly the name changes. I don’t mind changing suffixes for the most part, but when the entire name is changed to the point where it’s hard to even keep track of who anyone is, it’s annoying.
|
|
|
Post by Batchaser on May 5, 2021 13:29:21 GMT -5
Realism for sure. Making every cat, or close to it, LGBT+, for inclusivity- it bothers me because it's just changed to change, and adds nothing else to the rewrite. Adding real life genetics to the series and changing appearances for it. Political bias. Those dark topic stories (cannibalism, suicide, murder sprees). They were very popular on Wattpad a few years back. They got on my nerve. Changing the characters entirely. What's the point?
|
|
|
Post by Snowfire on May 5, 2021 13:33:36 GMT -5
Some rewrites I have read have relationships that can be uncomfortable or topics like r*** or the book can be over-detailed.
|
|
|
Post by tallshadowstar on May 7, 2021 17:46:23 GMT -5
Stilted or diminished character relationships (in a rewrite adhering to canon books) - If I can't see the mentorly affection between Bluestar and Firepaw, for example, the characters both lose a lot of charm.
Excessive lore/mythology - Added mythology can be cool, and is often very creative! But when the story grinds to a halt every few chapters so the characters can exposit about the cool mythos the author made, it feels very forced.
Spite for certain characters - If the main thing that differentiates an author's rewrite from the original is a canon character dying horribly and unnecessarily, I take it as a huge red flag.
Arrogance of the author - If the rest of a rewrite is good, I can excuse each of the above issues. But when an author portrays themselves and their revamp as superior to the original in every way, disses the original books excessively, and refuses to hear any feedback, I lose all interest. Mel Brooks said "in every spoof, I make love to the things I am spoofing"; i.e. he made his parodies out of a deep love for their source material. So in my view, when an author creates a rewrite solely out of spite or a feeling of superiority to the original books/authors, it inevitably taints their writing.
|
|
|
Post by vectoring34 on May 7, 2021 18:58:17 GMT -5
Stilted or diminished character relationships (in a rewrite adhering to canon books) - If I can't see the mentorly affection between Bluestar and Firepaw, for example, the characters both lose a lot of charm. Excessive lore/mythology - Added mythology can be cool, and is often very creative! But when the story grinds to a halt every few chapters so the characters can exposit about the cool mythos the author made, it feels very forced. Spite for certain characters - If the main thing that differentiates an author's rewrite from the original is a canon character dying horribly and unnecessarily, I take it as a huge red flag. Arrogance of the author - If the rest of a rewrite is good, I can excuse each of the above issues. But when an author portrays themselves and their revamp as superior to the original in every way, disses the original books excessively, and refuses to hear any feedback, I lose all interest. Mel Brooks said "in every spoof, I make love to the things I am spoofing"; i.e. he made his parodies out of a deep love for their source material. So in my view, when an author creates a rewrite solely out of spite or a feeling of superiority to the original books/authors, it inevitably taints their writing. The mythos one is especially true. I get that people want more depth of lore in the Warriors verse, but it is beyond obnoxious when they thrust in an explanation for every single little bit of lore in there with all the grace of a bull in a china shop. Make a separate lore story or chapters, do not just smash it in there. Or worse, do not just leave it to random Tumblr ask posts so it's impossible to find.
|
|