#patrick willems

[theworstofallpossibleworlds]

The Worst of All Possible Worlds 135: The Boss Baby Family Business feat. Patrick Willems

Patrick Willems (Night of the Coconut) returns to finish some unfinished business as he and the lads fight off the deep conservatism and unending baby ninja armies of Dreamworks’ 2021 babypalooza: The Boss Baby: Family Business. Topics include the nebulous target audience, the uncanny animation, and the consequences of pivoting from the increasingly bonkers Boss Baby lore to the terrors of…school choice???

[jetlagupdates]

Adam quote-retweeted Patrick Willems!

[ID: A tweet by Patrick Willems. It reads "making my grand debut in the Jet Lag credits today (I guest-edited 10 seconds of this ep. you'll know it when you see it)".

A quote-retweet by adam chase. It reads "my response when patrick sent me the edit". Attached is a screenshot of text messages between Adam and Patrick.

Patrick: Okay what about something like this

Adam: Hahahahahahahah this rocks

Patrick: whew that's a relief

Patrick: Any notes?

Adam: I have absolutely no notes

Adam: You crushed it

Adam: This rocks so hard

Adam: I'm just watching it over and over again

Adam: I interrupted Maeve's work to show her

End ID]

[smol-warrior-1258]

What's The Point Of A Faithful Mario Adaptation?

Obvs this is very focused on video games to movies, but honestly the discourse on adaptations writ large is exactly how I usually talk about it. I've had the conversation so many times talking about adaptations (typically book to movie/tv or remakes of movies/tv) and how any adaptation should be looking at how the new medium can be uniquely leveraged to reimagine the same content. If I ever find the time I want to check out some of the references he uses and read more.

That's basically the tl;dr bc the rest is a lot of assorted thoughts on adaptation & meta content without a ton of cohesive flow. I have a lot of feelings on the topic and not a lot of structure while expressing them . . .

A huge example of missing the mark re: changing medium is all the live action Disney remakes. I personally find them somewhat disappointing across the board simply because they don't use the live action-ness to any substantial effect. It reads much more as "live action is the ultimate goal in cinema on principle" than "live action would provide genuine enhancement to the material in ways the original animation couldn't" which feels very hollow as a viewer. (Not even considering The Lion King and it's souless and still ultimately animated 'realistic' animals) The engaging aspect of retellings as discussed in this video - ie that they're a fundamental aspect of the human condition re: storytelling - is to cast new light on a beloved piece of content and, in doing so, shine up one facet of a larger jewel. That will inherently mean deviations to some extent, but those deviations ideally work in conversation with the source material and other adaptations, and changes are made with a purpose that will theoretically make up for anything lost in the process.

On that topic, changes - large or small - are a very slippery slope. I am generally inclined to hold the first version I encounter of a particular story (whether that is the original or not) much closer to my heart, and prefer that all the little details that make it up remain untouched. It seems to me that without all those little things, the story simply wouldn't be precisely what it is, and tweaking elements can have a major ripple effect. All that said, changing mediums fundamentally changes the tools you're working with and therefore your ability to convey the same narrative. For example, the most common change from book to movie is simply to cut and/or shorten scenes. Books can be a lot longer/narratively dense than movies can and it is unreasonable to make a 6hr movie just to include every scene. They are tonally very different mediums, and the audience expectations differ as well. Much as I hate to see scenes cut, I can understand the limitation. Similarly, movies & tv are subject to ratings that books are not. Many adaptations have to tone down violence, gore, and other mature or taboo content just to reach the same audiences as their source material and therefore cannot be wholly text accurate (Game of Thrones and Outlander would definitely fall into that category). Those types of adjustments are all understandble even if they take away from the viewing experience for some people. A quick call out for things like Rent or Little Shop of Horrors where the endings were completely changed in specific recognition of the fact that character death is much easier for theatre audiences to stomach than to see on screen bc you get to break the immersion at the end. The real problem, in my opinion/experience, is when changes are made with no clear goal/rationale/purpose - or worse, when source content is removed but then new material is added without justifying the switch (especially when that then causes plot holes or other narrative problems that need to be resolved!) Those kinds of things not only feel like a slap to the face on principle, but can radically alter the larger tone and miss more foundational aspects of the source material (at best; at worst they can actively go against characterizations, plot points, or worldbuilding established in the source material - a personal pet peeve of mine).

There's also a whole conversation to be had about the phethora of movies adapted from books where they had to drastically expand the scope in order to fill a runtime. This mostly applies for picture book to movie adaptations (Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs, Horton Hears a Who, most versions of The Grinch Who Stole Christmas), but also for longer form novels that are just less involved (idk if that's the right word for it) than movie producers would like (The Hobbit though that's a topic unto itself and overdiscussed to boot, A Wrinkle in Time, I would even place Cats [the movie] in this category) Just as another aspect to consider, particularly when it comes to the video game to movie adaptations he talks about in the video, but I think it's a separate enough topic to not get into here.

This video also naturally made me think of fanfiction (my husband & I actually paused it to have a sidebar on the topic) and how it often serves the retelling function discussed in the video. There's the stuff like describing scenes from an alternative character pov, writing in scenes that were skipped/glossed over, expanding on background moments, etc which are fundamentally about producing more of the existing content but a little to the left, as it were, while generally operating within the confines of canon. We, as consumers of the source material, simply want to have more of a thing we like and thus the lovely creative fans of the world produce content to fulfill that desire. There is also the wide variety of truely adapted content in fanfiction like AUs, canon divergence, role swaps, non-canonical shipping, or introducing realistic elements to stylized and/or sanitized source content (cursing, violence/injury, sex or other explicit material, diverse characters, etc) which by & large enhance the overall experience of engaging with the source material even while altering it. Even the act of speculation & extrapolation in the form of headcanon-ing helps audiences participate in the process of storytelling and subsequently enjoy it more as an active process of engagement, rather than something passively consumed.

There is also a conversation to be had about using adaptation as a vessel for accessibility to larger, newer, or different audiences. This is both on a logistical level (ex audiobooks & visual adaptations for those with dyslexia, cinematic versions of broadway shows for those who cannot afford to see it on stage, etc) and on a more abtract level (ex recasting a story with a female lead like His Girl Friday does with The Front Page in order to examine how the same circumstances play out differently, using a modern setting to make a statement on society through the lens of a known story like West Side Story does with Romeo & Juliet, etc). Many current remakes & adaptations of beloved franchises are no doubt motivated by profitability, but it doesn't change the fact that a variety of new viewers are being exposed to the source content for the first time. We as fans hope that will only be the gateway drug introducing fresh faces to the entire fandom, but even if it doesn't (or if the adaptation is intolerable to those who were already fans) there is some intrinsic merit to expanding that audience. Fanfiction also often operates to open source material up to marginalized audiences in ways mass produced content doesn't, and allows sidelined stories to be told through known material.

Idk where I really meant to land with all this, but the video really helped me solidify my existing Adaptation Thoughts and I wanted more people to see it and engage in a very interesting conversation!

[mygreatadventurehasbegun]

"A.I. filmmaking is a grift. It is a way to make something that looks professional without putting in any of the work to learn how to do it for real, and without paying an actual cast or crew."

I haven't even finished this video yet, but I recommend you check it out.

[tentacleteapot]

at the beginning of the pandemic, I discovered a YouTube channel called patrickhwillems. the channel focuses on video essays, usually about film but sometimes dipping into television or comic books, all examined by someone who clearly understands and more importantly LOVES film and storytelling. Patrick is thoughtful, funny, interesting, and extremely smart, with a sense of humor that's alternately dry (but never mean) and whimsical, and he's a joy to watch. the fact that he often does videos where he explains movies to his parents, who are both an utter joy to watch (I love his mom so much), is just icing.

as the pandemic progressed, a subplot started to develop amidst the video essays, one where the YouTube audience gradually realized that the Patrick currently hosting the YouTube channel wasn't the Patrick who had started it. VERY near the beginning of 2020, a Patrick Willems from another dimension escaped from prison in his dimension and sought refuge in ours, bringing with him a diabolical interdimensional criminal and destroyer of worlds... currently taking the physical form of a coconut with googly eyes. his name was Charl (it's like Charles, but singular), and Charl was the key to Patrick's YouTube success.

the Charl subplot got bigger, and bigger. characters, played by Patrick's real-life friends, were killed off or saved from Charl or swayed by his silver-tongued manipulation, until finally... Patrick revealed that the finale to the Charl story was so big that it was essentially a feature-length movie. I just finished watching that movie tonight, and I am so very much in love with it. Night of the Coconut is silly, weird, ambitious, and utterly bonkers. it's sincere in its goals, there's very little winking asides about how droll or silly everything is, and the dialogue is always engaging and witty. even when you know a gag is coming, the actors always sell them. the score was unexpectedly great, too - I knew Patrick loved movies that had elaborate opening sequences and cool songs, so I wasn't surprised to see Night of the Coconut begin with a great musical number and some extremely enjoyable opening credits, but the fact that it all came together as well as it did was wonderful to see. I feel like I got to watch someone accomplish a dream, like I got to see somebody bring all their passions together into one project. there are shots in this film that he's raved about seeing in other movies! he put so much love and energy and silliness into every frame of this movie, and he successfully executed and perfected the concept of the big, ambitious YouTube Channel Movie that's been attempted and utterly failed at many times in the past. as a fan of his work, his YouTube channel, the storyline he's been writing, and the people he got to help him bring it to a close, I couldn't be happier. I'm glad I preordered the movie soundtrack, too, especially knowing it turned out to be AMAZING. I had such a fun time with this movie. this was really just what I needed and I definitely recommend it.

[ylojgtr]

i just watched patrick willem's video from 2018 on the last jedi called "what do we want from a star wars movie?" and im going to share my thoughts because no one can stop me, im 6 years late and i don't care

i like his channel a lot and i think he did a good job explaining it, but i agree maybe 50% with his main point. he says that fans who were upset with tlj were looking for the Star Wars Feeling™️ from a star wars movie, the feeling of nostalgia essentially, and that the eu normalizing explications for everything made fans less open to new stuff. the main thing *i* want to say though is about one of his supporting points: that the prequels didnt feel like star wars in that they weren't relatable like the ot.

i love the prequels man. of course, i grew up with them in a way many didn't (as well as tcw which just serves to heighten the movies), so there's definitely bias, but one thing i love about the prequels *is* that vastly different feeling. looking back, the ot could be described as campy, but every person ive talked to who saw Star Wars in 1977 said the effects and presentation were beyond any immersion they'd ever experienced before. the same cannot be said for ep. 1, even people who got into star wars from that movie (at least that ive heard), despite also being on the cutting edge of movie technology, and obviously the dialogue is way cheesier than anything written by anyone other than george lucas, but all that just adds to the vibes, ya know? the galaxy was in a different time then too, and i can't explain how much fun it is to experience these completely separate times in such a visceral way, intentional or otherwise, when watching through the saga

i hate the sequels. of the 3, tlj is far and away my favourite. i would have LOVED to see what trilogy rian johnson and his team could have cooked up if they'd been given control over the whole thing. i love tfa visually, and introduces some great characters (ahem, KYLO...also finn i love him) but just *feels* like anh remastered. if that's what you wanted, great! but for me, i was just sooo stoked to see what a new era would feel like that it really disappointed me. the main thing i hear from people who like tlj is that it takes the story in a different direction. and while i really appreciate that, and do like the force dyad stuff and finn and roses subplot and the not-lightsaber fight at the end AND what all that stuff means for the saga, it still has that feeling of sameness, at least to me, because it's trying to be something so different. the way i see it, it's trying to be *opposite* of what everyone expects, which means it needs to have that same feel in order to subvert it. which, again, is fine by me! tfa was already done and it has to fit that aesthetic to fit into the trilogy, and im just one fan. of course everyone hates ros which i guess tried to do opposite of what they did opposite in tlj? i don't know what they were on making that movie

another thing i wanted to bring up was the whole interconnectedness of the franchise. patrick brought up the eu to show how fans were taught that every detail has an explanation. no second of the ot was without a dozen books detailing what every character was doing in the background and how they came to be there. his point was that, when new characters are doing new things in unexpected ways, people don't like it cause there isn't a wookiepedia article on it yet to explain it exactly, and that that ties into why people hated tlj. i don't doubt it, but i also want to point out that that eu is a source of a lot of enjoyment too. i don't think he was denying this, or saying it was bad at all, but i just wanted to share that the eu is basically the reason im as big a fan as i am. the idea that everything is connected is appealing to me, and the way that star wars does it, where expanded material takes place in all different times and settings with no correlation to publishing date, just really appealed to me in contrast to the marvel way or any other big franchise like that. in any other series, each new installment progresses time forward. in star wars, we have infinite time to explore any era we want...which brings me back to how much i love the completely different aesthetics from the ot and pt. the variety is so refreshing. the galaxy feels so different between eras where the sequels just make it rebels vs empire again. we already have a billion books on rebels vs empire so...what expanded stories can i look forward to thats different in the sequel era? im sure there are lots, but the difference just won't be as great. also, star wars *is* goofy. patrick says it himself, bringing up that there were a lot more jokes in the ot. id argue the prequels take themselves so seriously that the seriousness becomes the goofiness (and i love it). ive said many times on this blog that i LOVE the stupid part of star wars lore. like yes, the fact that it's explained who the stormtrooper is that han killed and stole armour from and that he's fucking tarkin is SUPER UNNECESSARY but it's FUNNY AS FUCK. no one needs to know palpatines name is sheev but that's the best name ever? the problem isn't the lore, it's when people take it too seriously and don't allow for that innovation to happen that leads to more fun lore and stories. which i think is exactly what patrick was saying, he just didn't emphasize how enjoyable the unnecessary-ness of it all is and how distinct feels in different star wars eras are imperative to all these diverse avenues for story and fun to arise. (now do i think people should be able to survive lightsaber wounds? only cause of how much i love qui-gon, i admit to being a bit angry about that...but at the end of the day i don't really care that much? im here to have fun and yeah ill complain about it sometimes but just cause complaining is also fun)

that's why i love tcw (it fleshes out this distinct time period and political setting) and rebels (again, fleshes out the distinct era of extremely fleeting hope between the empire's reign and the coming of the saviour) and the heir to the empire novels (they establish a new era with a different feel—much more similar to the ot than the prequels are to the ot but still) and kotor (same as with htte but more similar to prequels) and the new jedi order and legacy (although it's also basically rebels vs empire, it has enough of a divergent story and tone that i like it) and the high republic in the disney canon (although i haven't digested as much of it as id like cause fuck disney)

but my main point: the thing i want from new star wars is a mix of things patrick seems to love,l AND things he seems to hate. yes i want it to be star wars, so there's some sort of familiar feeling there that needs to present, but i also want a twist on it. the ot was a classic fairy tale. the prequels were political thrillers (sometimes not so thrilling, but still). other stories people really liked act completely differently again, like the mandalorian being a western and also a heartwarming family bonding adventure or andor being a spy thriller and also the best star wars show. each era or sub-franchise has their distinct aesthetics and feels that future artists can make feel even more distinct and special yet theyre all connected which is just fun don't you think? the sequels would have made me a lot happier if they gave us some new ground for new feels the same way the prequels did. anyway that's my official response no one cares about to a 6 year old video. yay!

[karmaalwayswins]

Patrick (H) Willems "Everything Is Content Now" (2023)

[cinemagal]

Trivia for To Wong Foo, Thanks for Everything! Julie Newmar (1995) dir Beeban Kidron

[pablolf]

How To Analyze Movies – Film Studies 101

[biglisbonnews]

Why 'Creed' (Yes, 'Creed') Is the Best Movie Reboot Ever Made Like many reboots and legacy sequels, 'Creed' features the aging hero of the original films passing the reins of the series to a new generation. But what’s so striking about 'Creed' is how not nostalgic it is. https://www.inverse.com/entertainment/best-reboot-movie-creed

[jetlagupdates]

Adam QRT'd Patrick Willems!

[bethannangel]

Patrick! You can’t say that Top Gun is about figuring out one’s sexuality when that’s a fact!

[gaiash]

12 Days of Christmas - Day 3. Googly Eyes

If I had a nickel for every time I saw a movie in 2022 that had a round object with googly eyes, I'd have two nickels. Which isn't a lot, but it's weird that it happened twice, right?

12 Days of Christmas

Previous Years: 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022

Iron Bundle's Mowing You Down

End of an Era

Googly Eyes

I Know These Teeth

Hinata's Admirers

The Town Inside Me

Goblin Bard

Bonus Regeneration

Return to the Movies

No Strings On Me

Super Peach Sisters

Hat Swap

[bluntblade]

This crossover of interests might be limited to me and one other person, but I was rewatching one of Patrick Willems' early "Charl" videos from before the coconut could talk, and how there are these beats where characters look at Charl and it's just this dead-still shot of him...

And I went "oh my god, that's Geode. Except, evil."

[evilroachindustrial]

Patrick Willems really out here dropping the entirely on the money interpretation of Zack Snyder as utterly obsessed with the film, Excalibur, and an absolute basic bitch director (affectionate).

[starxcxboy]

— American Psycho (2000), directed by Mary Harron, based on the novel by Bret Easton Ellis.