Cosmere Adaptation Announcement

[Frustration]

11 hours ago, Schizoposting said:

TFE was Brandon's second published book, and while the concept is great, the actual execution isn't the best—a film adaption would negate the issues with the prose and dialogue, whilst (potentially) streamlining and improving the plot. While some purists may prefer the books, if the films end up being better, then the former will be overshadowed by the latter.

I also used to think that a film adaptation should be 100% faithful to the source; but overtime I realized that film is a fundamentally different medium, and that what works in a book, doesn't necessarily work in film. To put it bluntly: faithfulness to original doesn't matter; what matters is how good the film is. That's why Starship Troopers is a great adaptation, even though it's incredibly unfaithful.

I have to disagree quite strongly. The number of adaptations that are recognized as merely being good are very small. The number that are actually better than the source? I can count on one hand the number that I'm aware of.

And while film does allow you to do some things you can't with a book and vise versa, I honestly feel that that's a shield that adapters use to deflect from criticism. The best reason for a change I've ever seen was that dobby was too expensive for the Harry Potter films to animate so it was easier to have Nevil do it, which I don't even consider a very good reason.

10 hours ago, king of nowhere said:

Dune was great. Both movies.

Game of thrones was good for the first half.

Wheel of time wasn't great, but it wasn't terrible either. And it had great moments. Rhuidean alone was worth it.

One piece was wonderful.

Arcane, though not a real adaptation, was amazing.

So, there have been good adaptations. Especially when creators were given freedom and the original writer was supervising, which will be the case here. Even if this ends up less than stellar, it will probably still have plenty of stuff worth salvaging.

No, the only thing i'm not optimistic about is whether they will actually do it, or if the contract will collapse like all others. I'll believe this is really happening when i will be in the theater watching the end credits of the first mistborn movie.

I didn't see Dune so I can't say.

I'd consider that a failure for GoT honestly.

Wheel of Time depends on who you ask.

I'm not sure which One Piece you're talking about for sure, but the anime was made by a Japanese company, which is a whole other ballpark. I'd honestly be more excited if it was a Japanese company instead of Apple, though Apple is probably better than most other American ones for this project.

Arcane is a fair point I forgot about that one.

[Vielence She/Her]

I. AM. SO. EXCITED. 

I do not currently have enough to coherent thoughts to share currently, as most of it is screaming, but I will possibly be able to share later.

*more shrieks of joy*

 

[___ He/Him]

1 minute ago, VieB13 said:

I. AM. SO. EXCITED. 

I do not currently have enough to coherent thoughts to share currently, as most of it is screaming, but I will possibly be able to share later.

*more shrieks of joy*

 

THIS IS HOW I FEEL

[Aliroz-The-Confused]

12 hours ago, Schizoposting said:

TFE was Brandon's second published book, and while the concept is great, the actual execution isn't the best—a film adaption would negate the issues with the prose and dialogue, whilst (potentially) streamlining and improving the plot. While some purists may prefer the books, if the films end up being better, then the former will be overshadowed by the latter.

I absolutely disagree.  I think Rocky is better than Rocky II, and so on, with Rocky > Rocky II > Rocky III > Rocky IV > Rocky V.  Later works aren't necessarily better.

And TFE was nowhere near Moshe Feder's first work.

[RedBlue]

I love TFE, but I think there are definitely changes that could be made, both to improve it and to make it work as a movie with a reasonable runtime.

Behold relevant WOB from 2020:

 

Quote

 

Brandon Sanderson

So, one thing I think I did wrong in the books was not having more allomancer guards and soldiers who were women. I don't think our same gender norms would be the case on Scadrial.

One of the [screenplay] revisions is this: Shan is no longer Elend's fiance, but his sister. Their father has left on business to the outer domninances, and so Shan is making a play to secure the heirship, trying to prove she is more bold and strong than her brother. This is what gives the team an opening, and why they're striking now with the heist, as in this version, House Venture maintains the city policing and has access to the atium stash.

The plan is to put a few Allomancers (including Ham) into the Venture house guard, and exploit Shan's desire to prove herself by creating chaos in the city that she'll think she needs to put down with decisive action. That will involve her pulling out the atium stash, which will in turn let the team know where to go to rob them.

It streamlines the book's story in some elegant ways to do this. Shan becomes the primary "mark" of the book, in many ways. It also lets me explain a little more succinctly what various members of the crew are doing in the background while we focus on Vin, who is to get close to Shan as a confidant--which is why she's sent to the parties. And why Shan being a brat to her isn't just annoying, it means a major part of the plan isn't yet in place.

It explains way better, in my opinion, why Shan would act against Elend. It's all clicking into place as I move pieces around. That said, I understand those who want a Television show. I could see going that way, perhaps.

Trouble is, nobody in streaming needs a big fantasy property. Anywhere I go right now, I'd be in a distant second or third place to Tolkien, WoT, Witcher, or Kingkiller. The offers I've gotten have been for a fraction of the budget of those shows--since everyone has already spent big money on their big fantasy show, and isn't really interested in another.

I'm confident feature is the place I want Mistborn; but even if I weren't, I'm not thrilled by the idea of being lost on Netflix as their "other" fantasy show.

Rapharasium

I don't know if I'm being negative, but these changes really worry and disappoint me. I really like Era 1 as it is, and all this change in the dynamics of society and the plot as too drastic.

Brandon Sanderson

This isn't negative; I understand this response, and think it's valid.

At the same time, I'm of the personal philosophy that a film should generally be a different beast than a book--a book can lean into the little intricacies of a story, while a film should be a bold but unified statement.

Nothing will happen to the books; those will remain the same. But if I want this film to work as a film, I believe I need to be willing to re-imagine parts of the story.

Mycroft_canner

With Elend having a sister does that mean you don’t need the Zane plot anymore?

Brandon Sanderson

That's from the second book--so it would be in the television show, and we'd likely still do it.

DataLoreHD

prove she is more bold and strong than her brother

Which brother?It certainly could not be Elend, right? Elend had no Allomancy powers (before he ate the lerasium in WoA), so Straff despised Elend and thought him too weak.And Zane was a bastard and also mad dog.If Shan was Straff's legitimate daughter, then her succession was already 100% secure. She wouldn't need to prove anything to anybody.

Brandon Sanderson

It will be Elend, but it's more that this is the first time that Shan gets to be on her own, leading by herself, and wants to show off for the Lord Ruler. Also, there's the question of whether the male heir--though inferior in this case--might get the nod for sexism reasons. I think it's going to work just fine, but I'll admit, it's getting a little rough to discuss all these details on a thread like this--I can't answer everyone's questions, I'm afraid. I just wanted to indicate the kinds of changes I'm looking at making.

Whatever I do will go through my standard "show it to tons of beta readers and get feedback" process, so I should be able to catch problems and fix them.

meh84f

The bit about atium is a bit confusing. The Ventures are going to have the Atium stash? Not the stash that we don’t find until the end I’m assuming? So it’ll be a stash but much smaller than expected?

Brandon Sanderson

So, I'm not sure I can explain it all in this, but one big change I wished I'd made from the start of Mistborn is making atium usable by all Allomancers. As I've gotten further in the cosmere, using a god metal as just for Mistborn has felt off.

So the lore change for the films will mean any Allomancer can use atium. This, in turn, lets House Venture have access to the LR's atium as a "Control the city" last resort. They keep a task force of allomancers for this purpose--which Ham can join, in anticipation of being able to steal it once Shan accesses it. (They don't know that House Venture is only given about a hundred beads of atium, not access to the full mythical cache, which will be reserved for the third movie.)

Makes the worldbuilding and storytelling more elegant, I've found, in the film. And it fits better with more "modern" cosmere fundamentals as have developed over the last decade. I think I'd make this change even if we moved to a television show and long form.

The Lord Ruler is still the "big bad" but Shan and the Inquisitors both get a little more screen time. (Actually, about the same as in the books--it's just that other parts are being trimmed, making them more front-and-center.)

Phantine

Based on that, you're also streamlining away the Sign of Sixteen if it gets a sequel? To be honest, that didn't really work for me in the novel anyway.

Brandon Sanderson

It's one of my least favorite parts of the trilogy. It (along with Vin drawing upon the mists in book one) are big changes I'm hoping to make to fix weaker sections of the continuity.

General Reddit 2020 (June 22, 2020)

 

I like the idea of fixing the gender ratio for minor characters and extras, and I would be down for seeing a version of the story where Shan is more important (and, y’know, interesting).

[Aliroz-The-Confused]

As always, mister Sanderson's casual contempt for his earlier work is disappointing and deeply sad, and shows that his intention is to overwrite and correct what he sees as Not Good or at least Not Good Enough.

The sign of sixteen is one of my favorite plot twists in fiction.  Vin drawing upon the mists is one of my favorite parts of book one.

I don't mind gender changes at all, but I wish mister Sanderson could appreciate that his earlier work can be and is loved just the way it is without needing to be "better".

Edited January 30 by Aliroz-The-Confused

[Nesh he/him]

53 minutes ago, Aliroz-The-Confused said:

Vin drawing upon the mists is one of my favorite parts of book one.

Don't get me wrong, I adore book 1, but I understand some of the issue with drawing on the mists does come across as a deus ex machina in that book.

[Schizoposting]

2 hours ago, Frustration said:

I have to disagree quite strongly. The number of adaptations that are recognized as merely being good are very small. The number that are actually better than the source? I can count on one hand the number that I'm aware of.

Basically, every great film, ever, is an adaptation of some sort: It's a Wonderful Life, Vertigo, The Godfather, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Blade Runner, The Princess Bride, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, The Shawshank Redemption, Eyes Wide Shut, The Prestige, Arrival, etc. Now, I haven't actually read any of the originals, so it's entirely possible that something like Dream Story is a literary masterpiece, and that Kubrick is just some hack. But I doubt it. 

2 hours ago, Frustration said:

And while film does allow you to do some things you can't with a book and vise versa, I honestly feel that that's a shield that adapters use to deflect from criticism. The best reason for a change I've ever seen was that dobby was too expensive for the Harry Potter films to animate so it was easier to have Nevil do it, which I don't even consider a very good reason.

Why should adaptations try to be faithful to the material? In fact, I think that adaptations should either try to improve on the original or reinterpret it in some way; otherwise, there's no point in trying to do the exact same thing over and over again. 

1 hour ago, Aliroz-The-Confused said:

I absolutely disagree.  I think Rocky is better than Rocky II, and so on, with Rocky > Rocky II > Rocky III > Rocky IV > Rocky V.  Later works aren't necessarily better.

True, in some cases (like with Tad Williams, but only because MST is a veritable masterpiece) their first or second work is their best, and everything after that is just trying to live up to that; but this doesn't apply to Brandon, whose best work is Stormlight, by far.  

59 minutes ago, Aliroz-The-Confused said:

As always, mister Sanderson's casual contempt for his earlier work is disappointing and deeply sad, and shows that his intention is to overwrite and correct what he sees as Not Good or at least Not Good Enough.

If the books were good enough, there'd be no need to make an adaptation.

[Nesh he/him]

3 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

If the books were good enough, there'd be no need to make an adaptation.

I don't think there's a need for adaptation per se, but it's nice to have.

[Frustration]

41 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

Basically, every great film, ever, is an adaptation of some sort: It's a Wonderful Life, Vertigo, The Godfather, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Blade Runner, The Princess Bride, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, The Shawshank Redemption, Eyes Wide Shut, The Prestige, Arrival, etc. Now, I haven't actually read any of the originals, so it's entirely possible that something like Dream Story is a literary masterpiece, and that Kubrick is just some hack. But I doubt it. 

I haven't seen those so I won't say.

What I will say is that someone tried buying the rights to Emperor's Soul in order to make their own story into a film. Even if that made a better story than the Emperor's Soul that wouldn't make it an adaptation of The Emperors Soul. That's its own story stealing names for IP recognition. I don't think that counts.

41 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

Why should adaptations try to be faithful to the material? In fact, I think that adaptations should either try to improve on the original or reinterpret it in some way; otherwise, there's no point in trying to do the exact same thing over and over again. 

If the books were good enough, there'd be no need to make an adaptation.

Because I'm not paying to see someone's Mistborn fanfiction. If I wanted that it's free online. I'm paying to see the book I know and love in a visual format.

That's the whole point of making a movie out of an existing IP instead of an entirely original story. People aren't going to see a new or experimental story, they're coming for a story they already know.

41 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

If the books were good enough, there'd be no need to make an adaptation.

There isn't a need, just a want.

Edited January 30 by Frustration

[Oranjejuicemonki He/Him]

4 minutes ago, Frustration said:

Because I'm not paying to see someone's Mistborn fanfiction. If I wanted that it's free online. I'm paying to see the book I know and love in a visual format.

That's the whole point of making a movie out of an existing IP instead of an entirely original story. People aren't going to see a new or experimental story, they're coming for a story they already know.

You may not want to watch any of the adaptations then. Brandon has said on Intentionally Blank that he thinks the point of adaptations is the adaptation part like where you change things just a little. He says if it's all exactly the same it'd just be boring. I think Misborn's adaptation will be similar but also different. (Idk what episode off the top of my head and I'm too lazy to find and quote it so you'll have to just take my word for it. I'll bet he says something similar during the livestream later today though).

I think I'll like it and I don't think anything will be changed too drastically. That said, if you go in expecting the exact same thing you'll probably be very disappointed because although Brandon has a lot of control, I can't imagine he's going to choose to do everything the same.

[Frustration]

Just now, Oranjejuicemonki said:

You may not want to watch any of the adaptations then. Brandon has said on Intentionally Blank that he thinks the point of adaptations is the adaptation part like where you change things just a little. He says if it's all exactly the same it'd just be boring. I think Misborn's adaptation will be similar but also different. (Idk what episode off the top of my head and I'm too lazy to find and quote it so you'll have to just take my word for it. I'll bet he says something similar during the livestream later today though).

I think I'll like it and I don't think anything will be changed too drastically. That said, if you go in expecting the exact same thing you'll probably be very disappointed because although Brandon has a lot of control, I can't imagine he's going to choose to do everything the same.

Yeah I know the episode.

That post actually comes from a rant I had because of said episode.

 

I mean I reread the same books, and rewatch the same movies if they're good enough. If I've read Mistborn 3-4 times and I'm willing to do it again why would I not watch the movie version?

50 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

True, in some cases (like with Tad Williams, but only because MST is a veritable masterpiece) their first or second work is their best, and everything after that is just trying to live up to that; but this doesn't apply to Brandon, whose best work is Stormlight, by far.  

I somehow didn't respond to this one first but I must disagree.

While Roshar is the best of the worlds, has the best theories, while the experience of reading a book so massive if you drop the series it registers on the Richter scale is amazing, Mistborn is the better series from a story standpoint.

The tension, stakes and tone are a lot more consistent and a lot better in Mistborn than Stormlight.

[Immortal Platypus]

53 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

If the books were good enough, there'd be no need to make an adaptation.

a) I strongly disagree with that idea and b) there isn't a need for this adaptation, it's simply a want. 

Were the LotR books good enough as they were? 

[Schizoposting]

52 minutes ago, Nesh said:

I don't think there's a need for adaptation per se, but it's nice to have.

Why would it be nice to have? I'm genuinely curious why you think this.

19 minutes ago, Frustration said:

I haven't seen those so I won't say.

These are some of the most well renowned films out there; it's fine if you don't watch films but declaring that all adaptations are bad based off of limited experience is ridiculous. 

19 minutes ago, Frustration said:

What I will say is that someone tried buying the rights to Emperor's Soul in order to make their own story into a film. Even if that made a better story than the Emperor's Soul that wouldn't make it an adaptation of The Emperors Soul. That's its own story stealing names for IP recognition. I don't think that counts.

I know what you're referring to, and that's not what I'm talking about; I'm talking about something like The Shining or Starship Troopers as being reinterpretations of the original, not that screenplay. 

19 minutes ago, Frustration said:

Because I'm not paying to see someone's Mistborn fanfiction. If I wanted that it's free online. I'm paying to see the book I know and love in a visual format.

What I'm saying is that it's more important that the film is good than that it's faithful to the original, not that there should be changes for their own sake. 

19 minutes ago, Frustration said:

That's the whole point of making a movie out of an existing IP instead of an entirely original story. People aren't going to see a new or experimental story, they're coming for a story they already know.

The films are being made for a general audience, not the hardcore fans; 99% of the viewers will not be familiar with the original.

10 minutes ago, Immortal Platypus said:

a) I strongly disagree with that idea and b) there isn't a need for this adaptation, it's simply a want. 

Were the LotR books good enough as they were? 

My point is that there's no such thing as a book that is "good enough".

[Immortal Platypus]

8 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

My point is that there's no such thing as a book that is "good enough".

Does every book then deserve and adaptation?

Does every book need an adaptation?

[Nesh he/him]

2 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

Why would it be nice to have? I'm genuinely curious why you think this.

First of all, I want to reiterate, I don't think it's needed, the books are good and popular on their own (Even the ones I have some things I didn't like in then like Wind and Truth were still good).  That said, this will help Brandon reach a wider audience, and some of them will pick up the books and future books, even if the majority might not.  It having a visual adaptation opens to door to some other things I would like to see, but that's got nothing to do with adaptation itself.  All that said, studios wanted these rights because of the built-in audience they know they can ask for lots of money from, so a faithful adaptation (Faithful not one to one as much as we'd like it, the nature of movies means things will be cut and changed) is paramount to getting those fans to watch it and to have good word of mouth.

[Oranjejuicemonki He/Him]

3 hours ago, Frustration said:

The number that are actually better than the source? I can count on one hand the number that I'm aware of.

Valid. I don't think any Cosmere adaptations will be better than the original books. That's ridiculous to even think about. I am still excited to see what happens. 

6 minutes ago, Schizoposting said:

What I'm saying is that it's more important that the film is good than that it's faithful to the original, not that there should be changes for their own sake. 

This is also super valid. I'd rather get a good Mistborn movie that's also different cause either way I'm gonna like the books more, but I want to have an adaptation that's enjoyable. Now if it could be faithful to the original and  an amazing film that'd be a different story entirely. I believe I would still rather the books, but I honestly could not tell you if I would rather a completely book accurate adaptation or with a few new ideas if they were both gonna be amazing in this fictional situation. I think Brandon and Frustration both have good points with how adaptations should be changed or preserved.

All in all, I think the most important thing with adaptations is the feeling you get from it. The LOTR movies were definitely not exactly the same as the books, but they kept enough similarities and when they added things it seemed legitimate. Watching those movies brings me joy because it reminds me of the books that I know and love. This is what I'm hoping for the Cosmere adaptations.

[Aliroz-The-Confused]

10 minutes ago, Oranjejuicemonki said:

All in all, I think the most important thing with adaptations is the feeling you get from it. The LOTR movies were definitely not exactly the same as the books, but they kept enough similarities and when they added things it seemed legitimate. Watching those movies brings me joy because it reminds me of the books that I know and love. This is what I'm hoping for the Cosmere adaptations.

I don't think mister Sanderson wants me to feel that.

[ParaTulip fae/faer (declines as she/her)]

15 minutes ago, Oranjejuicemonki said:

All in all, I think the most important thing with adaptations is the feeling you get from it. The LOTR movies were definitely not exactly the same as the books, but they kept enough similarities and when they added things it seemed legitimate. Watching those movies brings me joy because it reminds me of the books that I know and love. This is what I'm hoping for the Cosmere adaptations.

I actually think LotR has a really simple direct comparison with what @Aliroz-The-Confused wants from the Cosmere adaptation: Did you notice that the world and text of LotR has strong Roman Catholic undertones? If you don't see it in the movies, but think you would notice if they were there, then that is a problem.

Mr Tolkien really was huge on being Roman Catholic. Even though no one in LotR takes the Eucharist or heeds the words of a Bishop of Rome, it informs his writing in what I think would be similar ways to how one might understand Mr Sanderson's writing as being informed by his... what is the grammar that matches "being Roman Catholic" but for members of the Church of Latter Day Saints? I am genuinely unsure how to phrase that. I have been told before that there are definitely wrong ways to do it.

[Oranjejuicemonki He/Him]

41 minutes ago, ParaTulip said:

One might understand Mr Sanderson's writing as being informed by his... what is the grammar that matches "being Roman Catholic" but for members of the Church of Latter Day Saints? I am genuinely unsure how to phrase that. I have been told before that there are definitely wrong ways to do it.

I'd probably say "One might understand Mr Sanderson's writing as being informed by his membership in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints." Also if you said by his Mormonism or just Church of Latter Day Saints like you did, most everyone will know what you're talking about so it's not a super big deal. The only thing is if you want to be accurate in using the name to express the beliefs then the most important part of the name is Jesus Christ.

[Aliroz-The-Confused]

The final form of my question is as such:

 

Aliroz-The-Confused says: Mister Sanderson, I'm a longtime fan (since 2009), and we share the same faith.  One of the things that meant a lot to me about the original Mistborn trilogy was that certain things were open to multiple interpretations, particularly Vin and Elend's relationship prior to their marriage (which you have said you imagine one way but leave it open for people with such standards to imagine it as more chaste... an interpretation which resonates deeply with me in the same way that Renarin, Rlain, and Ranette resonate with the ones who feel represented by them).  My question is this:  Will the movies also be open to such interpretation, or do you intend to close that door and confirm explicit interpretations of the characters' relationships even if it means making readers like me feel excluded?

Edited January 31 by Aliroz-The-Confused

[Frustration]

2 minutes ago, Aliroz-The-Confused said:

The final form of my question is as such:

 

Aliroz-The-Confused says: Mister Sanderson, I'm a longtime fan (since 2009), and we share the same faith.  One of the things that meant a lot to me about the original Mistborn trilogy was that certain things were open to multiple interpretations, particularly Vin and Elend's relationship prior to their marriage (which you have said you imagine one way but leave it open for people with such standards to imagine it as more chaste... an interpretation which resonates deeply with me in the same way that Renarin, Rlain, and Ranette resonate with the ones who feel represented by them).  My question is this:  Will the movies also be open to such interpretation, or do you intend to close that door and confirm explicit interpretations of the characters' relationships even if it means making readers like me feel excluded?

I wish you luck.

 

I have a thing later, but I'll see if I can ask it before I leave.

[Oranjejuicemonki He/Him]

10 minutes ago, Aliroz-The-Confused said:

The final form of my question is as such:

 

Aliroz-The-Confused says: Mister Sanderson, I'm a longtime fan (since 2009), and we share the same faith.  One of the things that meant a lot to me about the original Mistborn trilogy was that certain things were open to multiple interpretations, particularly Vin and Elend's relationship prior to their marriage (which you have said you imagine one way but leave it open for people with such standards to imagine it as more chaste... an interpretation which resonates deeply with me in the same way that Renarin, Rlain, and Ranette resonate with the ones who feel represented by them).  My question is this:  Will the movies also be open to such interpretation, or do you intend to close that door and confirm explicit interpretations of the characters' relationships even if it means making readers like me feel excluded?

I have a similar concern that I don't want the adaptations to be super explicit. I wouldn't enjoy watching that and I do want to watch adaptations of the Cosmere.

I don't think if it is explicit that you have to take that as confirmation that the books you've always loved is the same way. If the adaptations are super bad then I won't watch them but they're adaptations so they've changed. Hopefully that makes you feel better. I always try to see adaptations in that way. They're a different, but very similar story.

 

[Usseewa ✾ She♡Her ✾]

Livestream got postponed btw, in case anyone is wondering.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Cosmere/comments/1qps9wy/update_from_brandon/

Quote

UPDATE FRI JAN 30: Per the comment below, posted in the chat for the link above, the livestream has been postponed. Updates will be forthcoming.

 

@BrandSanderson > Hey guys! This is Donald. We won't be going live tonight. Will share an updated date and time as soon as possible. Thanks for understanding and have a great evening!

 

[ParaTulip fae/faer (declines as she/her)]

1 hour ago, Oranjejuicemonki said:

Also if you said by his Mormonism

I have been told that's offensive. That word does have the same grammar as Catholic, being a adjectidal form, but alas I don't like using offensive names for others.

 

1 hour ago, Oranjejuicemonki said:

The only thing is if you want to be accurate in using the name to express the beliefs then the most important part of the name is Jesus Christ.

I would make a point that Roman Catholics would say their relevant equivalent name is "The Church of Christ" too. I am trying to distinguish between two groups of people who both cite to the apostle Paul.