• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

News Live-Action ‘Cowboy Bebop’ tv series in the works

StCoop said:
Well the reviews are out and let's put it this way, they make Eternals reception look good.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-reviews/cowboy-bebop-review-123504731

https://ew.com/tv/tv-reviews/netflix-live-action-cowboy-bebop-review/

https://www.avclub.com/netflix-s-cowboy-bebop-is-a-bloodless-substitute-for-th-1848040283
Click to expand...

OMG, every writer on the internet needs to have the actual meaning of the word "intergalactic" beaten into their skulls. Bebop isn't even interstellar, much less intergalactic.
 
StCoop said:
Well the reviews are out and let's put it this way, they make Eternals reception look good.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-reviews/cowboy-bebop-review-123504731

https://ew.com/tv/tv-reviews/netflix-live-action-cowboy-bebop-review/

https://www.avclub.com/netflix-s-cowboy-bebop-is-a-bloodless-substitute-for-th-1848040283
Click to expand...

Every reviewer seems to have seen, if not been a fan of, the cartoon. There’s also a lot of “what’s the point of this, just watch the cartoon”. Like they don’t realize some people just aren’t going to watch the cartoon no matter how well done. Just like some people aren’t going to play games like “Last of Us” no matter how good the writing, acting or music is. These things are done to reach even bigger audiences, not solely for the existing fanbase. I own the cartoon, and love it. So far live action looks good and I’m gonna keep an open mind.
 
Saul said:
I read one review which came off as catty at best. Describing aspects of the show as "knockoffs" of 'Firefly' made me skim the rest of the review.
Click to expand...

It would be like if there's a remake of the Hidden Fortress and the reviewer talks about it ripping off aspects of Star Wars A New Hope ;)
 
Yeah, that bugged me with John Carter. Every time I saw someone complain about how much it was like Star Wars or other stuff like that, I just wanted to scream at my computer that it was where that stuff came from.
I still don't understand why they didn't make a bigger deal out of it's history in the promotion for it.

IGN actually seemed to mostly like the live action Cowboy Bepop, they gave it a 7/10, they liked how it adapted the stuff from the anime, but weren't as happy with the new stuff they added.
 
JD said:
Yeah, that bugged me with John Carter. Every time I saw someone complain about how much it was like Star Wars or other stuff like that, I just wanted to scream at my computer that it was where that stuff came from.
I still don't understand why they didn't make a bigger deal out of it's history in the promotion for it.
Click to expand...

I think it fell prey to a change in leadership at Disney, with the new guard not being invested in promoting the old guard's productions, so they really shortchanged it in the promotional department. The generic-sounding title certainly didn't help. They didn't want to call it A Princess of Mars for fear it would be mistaken for a romantic comedy or something, but they could've called it John Carter, Warlord of Mars, or at least Warlord of Mars.


IGN actually seemed to mostly like the live action Cowboy Bepop, they gave it a 7/10, they liked how it adapted the stuff from the anime, but weren't as happy with the new stuff they added.
Click to expand...

The io9 review is kind of the opposite, saying that the added Julia/Vicious stuff is the best improvement.
 
The Scarlett Johansson live action Ghost in the Shell movie got suboptimal reviews from critics who liked the anime. I saw the anime and read the manga long before that movie came out, and I thought the live action version was... okay. I've probably watched it three times by now. Is it as good? No. Is it occasionally wrongheaded? Sure. Is it a travesty that must be wiped from the consciousness of every GitS fan who's seen it? Hardly. It's not as good as the original movie or Stand Alone Complex, but it's not as hard to get into as SAC_2045's annoying CGI animation, either.

So... if I have pretty much the same basic reaction to the live action Cowboy Bebop, that's fine. They aren't taking the original away from me. And if it turns out that I really enjoy it, well, great.
 
Incidentally, isn't it weird that Netflix's content advisory for the Bebop anime says it's TV-MA for nudity and smoking, but doesn't mention violence? There's a lot more of that than there is of the other two things.
 
StCoop said:
Welcome to America where words and body parts are far worse than violence.
Click to expand...

True, but that doesn't change the fact that content advisory systems do routinely list violence. From Netflix's own help page: "Netflix sets maturity ratings by the frequency and impact of mature content in a title, such as the amount of violence, sex, adult language, nudity, or substance use that may be present." So we know they do call out violence in other shows, which is why it's anomalous that they don't in this one.
 
I was looking at some of the other shows on their, and the content warnings are odd, The Magicians is gets pretty graphically violent, and that doesn't mention violence in the warnings either, and neither do Stargate Sg-1 or Legacies which are pretty violent at times too. SG-1 is rated TV-MA, with the only content warning being for nudity. I'm a little surprised they actually still have the version of the SG-1 pilot with the nudity, I would have thought they would have changed over to the nudity free version, since that seems to be the creators' preferred version.
 
Last edited:
JD said:
I'm a little surprised they actually still have the version of the SG-1 pilot with the nudity, I would have thought they would have changed over to the nudity free version, since that seems to be the creators' preferred version.
Click to expand...

I have mixed feelings there, since the producers' cut is definitely superior overall, but I really like the nude scene.
 
The nude scene was pointless and unnecessary, especially since the rest of the pilot and the whole series after it never really went beyond a PG-13 level.
 
JD said:
The nude scene was pointless and unnecessary, especially since the rest of the pilot and the whole series after it never really went beyond a PG-13 level.
Click to expand...

It was a Showtime series in its first five years. Pay cable networks liked their shows to be more adult than what you could get on commercial TV, so there was a lot of nudity, sex, violence, etc. in them, something you still see in shows on HBO, Netflix, and the like. Showtime's Outer Limits remake, from some of the same producers as SG-1, featured nudity and sexual themes on a routine basis, though they filmed tamer alternate scenes for free-TV syndication. For whatever reason, the SG-1 producers preferred not to continue the practice beyond the pilot, even though TOL and other shows did. I guess they just didn't envision it as an adults-only show.
 
From what I've read, they never wanted to do it in the first place, the Showtime people forced g]them.
Just to be clear, I have no problem with nudity, I just watched Halsey's movie, and she did two full frontal nude scenes, and I really enjoyed it, they felt appropriate, and in the case of the second in that case served a pretty clear thematic purpose, but the one in Children of the Gods was only there because they were on Showtime.
 
Sure, the nude scene in the SG-1 pilot is gratuitous, no doubt. I fully understand the creators' preference for removing it and don't need to be convinced. I'm just saying that, on a shallower level, it's still very nice to watch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top