Latest / This Film is Lit / Prequel to The Scorch Trials - The Shawshank Redemption Fan Reaction, The Scorch Trials Preview

Transcript

Prequel to The Scorch Trials - The Shawshank Redemption Fan Reaction, The Scorch Trials Preview · This Film is Lit

• 0:09
  Speaker A: On this week's prequel episode, we follow up on our Shawshank Redemption listener polls and preview the Maze the Scorch Trials. Hello and welcome back to this film is with the podcast where we talk about movies that are based on books. It's another prequel episode. We have quite a bit of feedback to get to about the Shawshank Redemption as well as a preview of both the Scorch Trials book and movie. So we'll jump right in to our patron shoutouts.
• 0:41
  Speaker B: I put up with you because your father and mother were our finest patrons. That's why.
• 0:45
  Speaker A: No new patrons this week. But we do have our Academy Award winning patrons and they are Nicole Goble, Eric Harpo Rat, top salesman for May at Tfilpod, Vicapocalypse, Mathilde Cottonwood, Steve. Teresa Schwartz, Ian from Wine Country, Kelly Napier, Gratch Justgratch. Shelby says it's not helping the summer series that I just read. Sunrise on the Reaping. That darn Skag and V. Frank, thank you all very much for your continued support. We really appreciate it. Sunrise on the Reaping, I think, is the new.
• 1:17
  Speaker B: It's the new Hunger Games.
• 1:18
  Speaker A: Hunger Games, about Haymitch's Hunger Games, I've not read.
• 1:22
  Speaker B: I still have not read. Yeah, Songbirds and Snakes. I kind of assumed that we would cover both of them at some point. So I was.
• 1:31
  Speaker A: That's. Honestly, that could be a good future summer series. That's better because I guess they're, well, not really as much of a summer series, but because they're not like super related.
• 1:38
  Speaker B: We would have. We would.
• 1:41
  Speaker A: It's just a prequel series, but I don't know how like connected they are.
• 1:44
  Speaker B: I don't know if they're per se, but we'll have to wait a minute because I think the Sunrise on the Reaping is not. The movie is not out until like November 2026 or something.
• 1:57
  Speaker A: That would make sense because the book just came out like last month. Right, right. Very recently or something like that. So. Yeah, well, we'll see. But that'll. Yeah, it would make sense. We'll probably do them eventually, so. All right, thank you all for your continued support. Katie, it's time to see what people had to say about the Shawshank Redemption. Yeah, well, you know, that's just like.
• 2:19
  Speaker B: Opinion man on Patreon. We had four votes for the movie, one for the book, and two listeners who couldn't decide. Kelly Napier said, I'm not sure how this happened, but watching this was the first time I had ever seen this Movie.
• 2:34
  Speaker A: That's impressive.
• 2:36
  Speaker B: I went in with pretty high expectations because all I had ever heard was it was the greatest movie of all time. And I was pleasantly surprised at how much I enjoyed it. The novella was very good, but definitely not the strongest king work I've read, as I found the jumping back and forth in time to be hard to follow. The movie did exactly what adaptation.
• 2:55
  Speaker A: It's interesting. I bet. I bet I didn't have as much issue with that because I'd seen the movie so much that the time was not like, when things were happening. Wasn't really an issue.
• 3:04
  Speaker B: Yeah. You had the movie as like a guideline.
• 3:06
  Speaker A: Yeah, I kind of. I had seen the movie enough to roughly know, like, the order of events and when stuff happens.
• 3:10
  Speaker B: The movie did exactly what adaptations should do and found a way to improve upon an already solid piece of work. One of the smartest things the movie did was combine all the wardens into one character. Being introduced to multiple different characters in the book, just to have them exit the canvas mere pages later felt so unnecessary.
• 3:30
  Speaker A: I agree that the change makes a lot of sense. My guess would be that the thought is that that's more realistic. I would bet that prison wardens. I don't know. But I wouldn't be surprised if there was a fair amount of turnover.
• 3:44
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 3:44
  Speaker A: Especially back then from scandals and stuff like. Or whatever.
• 3:47
  Speaker B: Right.
• 3:48
  Speaker A: So I bet that was just an attempt to make it a more realistic portrayal of like. And. And kind of helps with the passage of time, like showing that we've been through several different regimes. But for the course purposes of the movie, I think having it be one person makes a lot more sense.
• 4:01
  Speaker B: For sure. The acting was superb. And I agree with you that the way they handled the character of Tommy was way better than what the book did. Literally. The only thing I didn't like in the movie was the rock at the wall in Buxton. The book and movie both described it as a rock that had no business being in a field in Maine. And honestly, it just looked like another rock.
• 4:24
  Speaker A: Interesting. To me, it's because they specifically say it's volcanic glass. And it looks to me like a piece of volcanic glass. In the movie now, it's not super distinct, but it's like dark, black and glassy looking, whereas all the other rocks there are kind of gray, generic. Roc.
• 4:41
  Speaker B: Mm.
• 4:42
  Speaker A: It's not like the most striking, like, difference.
• 4:46
  Speaker B: You would have to look for it.
• 4:47
  Speaker A: You would have to. Yeah. But to me, I was like, yeah, that's volcanic Gl. Like, that is a. That's It's a. It's a black piece of. Whatever the. I keep calling. It's got a name that I'm. It's not shale, but what the heck is volcanic glass?
• 5:01
  Speaker B: Yeah. I don't know that off the top of my head.
• 5:03
  Speaker A: It has a name, and now I'm. Anyways, sorry, continue.
• 5:06
  Speaker B: I was gonna say you're gonna have it in a second here.
• 5:09
  Speaker A: Obsidian. That's the word I was looking for, which there may be a difference between. Maybe not all volcanic glass is obsidian, but obsidian is. Yeah. So obsidian is a naturally occurring volcanic glass. I think it's supposed to be obsidian in the movie, because it is. That's. It's like a black, shiny, volcanic obsidian. Yeah, it's called obsidian.
• 5:32
  Speaker B: Also a word often used to describe the Twilight vampire's eyes. Were they black when they were black? Yes. When they were hungry. Kelly finished up her comment by saying, you've covered enough King properties to know I'm a big fan of his, but in this case, the movie wins hands down. Our next comment was from Shelby, who said, this one's a tie for me, though I don't have much to add. Brian mentioned how he thought it was better to know what Red was in for. But I can't help wondering if this movie would be another Fight Club. Now, if they had. Considering how bad people are at media literacy, would Red be seen as another Joker or Homelander? Now, for one thing, we're actually supposed to root for him. On the other hand, he's not just another broody guy with anger issues.
• 6:25
  Speaker A: I don't think he would be seen in, like, misinterpreted in the way this character, like Joker or Home and Lander is. Because he's not, quote unquote, like, the right kind of. He wouldn't be the right kind of, like, bad guy. I don't think, for that.
• 6:43
  Speaker B: That audience to latch on to. I think even if. I think even if we knew what he was in for in the movie, he wouldn't be, like, gleeful about it.
• 6:57
  Speaker A: No, that's the thing is that he's also. Yeah, he's not. He's. He regrets what he did.
• 7:04
  Speaker B: Yes.
• 7:05
  Speaker A: And he feels bad about it. So I don't know if you could. If an audience could misinterpret and think that, like, he's right or something. Like, because he doesn't. He doesn't. He wouldn't be espousing a view that, like, right, he was justified or. You know what I mean?
• 7:22
  Speaker B: There's no view to misinterpret I think. And also, if I may, assuming that everything else about the movie was the same and we just also knew what he was in for. He's also not like a young white guy.
• 7:39
  Speaker A: Yes. So that is true as well. Yes. Yeah. I think that would also weigh in to that. Make sure we don't. I don't. At some point in this, make sure we get your feelings on the movie.
• 7:51
  Speaker B: Oh, okay. Yeah.
• 7:53
  Speaker A: It doesn't have to be right in the middle of his comment and it doesn't have to be right in the middle at some point. I just don't want to forget.
• 7:57
  Speaker B: We remember. And we'll come back to that. That put a pin in that. All right. Our last comment on Patreon was from Charlene, who said I'd read the novella once about a decade ago, and I just reread it. I'd love to rewatch the movie as well, but with my 10 and 6 year olds around, finding a safe time to watch something like this takes a bit more planning than reading does. Luckily, I have far stronger memories of a movie I've seen countless times. They're both excellent. But the movie wins. It's both a great movie and a great adaptation, keeping the core of the story and most of the great lines. I can remember watching the movie after getting more familiar with King's writing but before I'd actually read this one and guessing that most of Red's narration was taken directly from the book. It just sounds like him.
• 8:45
  Speaker A: That's interesting. I'm not familiar enough with King to have known that, because I. I don't know if I'd read any King before I read this.
• 8:52
  Speaker B: Yeah, I think we.
• 8:53
  Speaker A: Other than excerpts from stuff. I know I've read excerpts from stuff, but I don't think I've ever like read a whole King.
• 8:59
  Speaker B: I feel. I feel like so well versed on Stephen King now.
• 9:03
  Speaker A: Yeah, you've read them all up until.
• 9:04
  Speaker B: This point, seven years deep into this podcast. On the other hand, Darabont. Is that the correct way to say that Darabont does really get King's style. And then there's the quote. I'd like to think that the last thing that went through his head, other than the bullet, is absolutely a lion King could have written. Brian said he felt like the ending was a studio note, and I'm pretty sure I heard at some point that it was meant to end with Red on the bus. And the I hope line almost assuredly.
• 9:35
  Speaker A: Had to have been. It just makes too much sense, especially with how faithful everything else about the book is. And the whole purpose being like, it's ending on the hope.
• 9:43
  Speaker B: Yeah. But they added the final scene after test audiences wanted a more satisfying resolution. Yeah, for me, it's six of one. I think an ambiguous but hopeful ending is fitting, but I'm not going to turn down the bromantic reunion.
• 10:01
  Speaker A: Yeah, no, I mean, I agree. I feel very much the same. I think from like a. What's a better way to do it that is more in line thematically with what the book is doing in the story in general. Book or movie is doing is leaving it a little more ambiguous on the idea of the hope of a reunion, but not actually seeing it just falls way more in line with, again, the whole point of the story. But it's fine. It's showing them.
• 10:35
  Speaker B: And I mean, I can understand that the average audience moviegoer would take in that ending and then be left going, where's the rest of it? Yeah, Like, I understand that that is the case for many people.
• 10:54
  Speaker A: We gotta get people better at watching movies.
• 10:57
  Speaker B: Listen, I feel like we're doing our part.
• 11:00
  Speaker A: We're trying. Yeah.
• 11:02
  Speaker B: And Charlene ended off her comment with great book, great movie, and as always, great discussion.
• 11:08
  Speaker A: Thank you.
• 11:09
  Speaker B: Over on Facebook, we had five votes for the movie and one for the book. And I think that one vote was also supposed to be a vote for the movie, but I'm going to throw the book a bone right here. Our first comment was from Terry, AKA my mom, who said, I haven't read the book, but the movie is one of my favorites.
• 11:29
  Speaker A: It doesn't surprise me. It seems like a movie your mom would enjoy.
• 11:31
  Speaker B: Definitely.
• 11:32
  Speaker A: I also, I'm surprised she hasn't read the book, actually.
• 11:34
  Speaker B: I also offered her our copy.
• 11:36
  Speaker A: That's actually what surprised me. She hadn't read the book. Especially because it's like, knock this out in an afternoon if you really wanted to. It's like 100 pages.
• 11:45
  Speaker B: Our next comment was from Matthew and Matthew said, I have always been a king fan books and films. This novella, along with the rest of Different Seasons to me is some of his best work. I saw the movie first when I was a teenager and was pleasantly surprised that the movie was almost one for one to the book, which does make it hard to choose. However, this is truly one of the best films I've seen in my lifetime. Perfectly cast, acted and directed. And that's why I have to give it to the movie.
• 12:16
  Speaker A: I mean, I generally agree. I wouldn't say. I don't think I'd put it as one of the best films I've seen in my lifetime, only because I think it's. And this is a feeling I got a little bit this time watching it. And it's not fair to the movie, probably, but there are elements of the movie that feel a little. One of the reasons is one of the things I discussed in the episode, which is the movie may not succeed entirely at its goal, or the book, for that matter, may not succeed entirely at its intended goal of humanizing prisoners and the people we put in prison. And not only that, but also at painting a positive portrayal of the idea that people can change and rehabilitate or whatever. Don't use that word if you don't want to, because that's the whole thing. But that people can change and that there can be a point where people who have even committed horrible crimes can be released in society and be a useful part of society. And that the. The way our prisons are constructed are brutal, dehumanizing monstrosities. Like, that's very clearly, to me what the point of the book and the movie is. But I don't think most people who watch these necessarily. I think people, like, on a surface level, get that message out of it. But the general sentiment I see from most Americans about incarceration in the United States is so antithetical to the message of this movie that I can't. It feels to me like the movie at least somewhat fails and for how popular of a movie it is. Although I guess the idea is like, well, it all comes down to compartmentalization, I think. Like, it's that thing where a lot of those people will be like, well, yeah, like Reds. Red's a good guy who can get let out of prison even though he killed somebody when he was younger. He's one of the good guys, but he's one of the good ones. Exactly. I'm sure it's that. But that is incredibly frustrating to me, and I don't know. So I just. I don't know. But my other note was gonna say is that I think some of the writing, both in the book and the movie, but particularly in the movie, that I would keep it from maybe to me being like one of the best movies of all time is a little. It's a little overwritten and a little. Some of the stuff in the movie, there was just some Mom. Where it felt a little almost overly saccharine. Oh, there was a really good, specific example that I'm trying to remember, that there was something in the movie that happened where I felt like this Is really. We're really overplaying. It may even been Tommy's related to Tommy's story. Where I felt like the movie was really overplaying the sentimentality in a way that felt kind of cheap to me and manipulative.
• 15:06
  Speaker B: A little maudlin.
• 15:07
  Speaker A: A maudlin might be the word for it. Where it felt overly contrived in order to evoke an emotional reaction. And maybe it was Tommy's story. There was some specific moment now and then. I'm not, and I don't think I mentioned it in the main episode, but I swear there was some specific moment where I had a thought while we were watching the movie. I was like, that's a little. Yeah. Modeling a little over. Overly overcooked. To pull an emotion out of us in a way that felt not as most of the movie, I think feels very natural and genuine and fair. But there was a couple moments where I was like, this feels a little overcooked. I wish I could think of the exact moment. It might have been related to Tommy and like him passing his test and the way that all plays out and then killing him may have felt a little. I think it was something else. I can't place what it is. Anyways, those are like my main critiques in the movie. In terms of the casting. I think perfect direction. I think it's service good to great. But not like it's not blowing you away. It's not game changing by any stretch. It's very, very good. It's just there's nothing like groundbreaking in it, I think would maybe be the way I'd put it. Which is fine. Like plenty of movies.
• 16:19
  Speaker B: I mean. Do you agree though that there was Nothing groundbreaking in 1990 before?
• 16:24
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 16:24
  Speaker B: Okay.
• 16:25
  Speaker A: I don't think there's anything in movie that's like.
• 16:27
  Speaker B: I just wanted to make sure to put it in that context.
• 16:29
  Speaker A: No, no. Yeah. Even within the context. I don't think there's anything groundbreaking visually in this movie. That being said, it's a very, very well directed movie. I don't think you. Every movie doesn't have to have something groundbreaking in it. But that is something to me that takes it from being like one of the greatest movies of all time to like, you know, it's not in the top maybe to me, like 1% of movies, it's in the top 5% of movies, which is quibbling over what greatest movies of all time, I guess. But to me that is like a very specific category that I think this is just like one notch below.
• 17:00
  Speaker B: Okay, are you ready for the next comment. All right, our last comment on Facebook was from Kat and Kat said Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption was the first full length king story I ever read.
• 17:14
  Speaker A: Oh, sorry. I'm so sorry. I thought of the moment and I actually included it as a positive, but I still felt this way. It's when Brooks and then this is because it's only in the movie when Brooks specifically has the line about how he thinks about Jake and how he hopes he has little bird friends out in the that was like, okay, like didn't even feel like it was like out of character or wrong. But it just felt a little overly emotionally manipulative to me about a character that we don't really know anything about. Cause he hasn't been in the movie that much. But it just felt like a way to really twist the knife on this very short little story about him and make him killing him sadder than it.
• 17:55
  Speaker B: That's fair.
• 17:55
  Speaker A: You know what I mean? That was just one of those moments where and I even, like I said, I think I even put that in better in the movie because I did. It's not even that I dislike it, it just that that moment in particular was one of the moments that felt overcooked and over designed to evoke an emotional reaction as opposed to just feeling completely natural. But anyway, sorry, I, I, it just popped into my head so I had to get it out.
• 18:18
  Speaker B: All right, back to Kat's comments. Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption was the first full length king story I ever read back in my film and lit class in high school. Prior to that class, I wasn't a huge the book is better nerd. Not because I wasn't an ass, but because my memory was usually not good enough to recall details unless I had reread the book shortly before seeing the movie. The Shawshank Redemption was the first time, at least that I can remember at this age, that the movie adaptation made me angry. The cheap Hollywood ending was a choice I found insulting to not only the book, but the rest of the otherwise great movie. However, since I haven't read the novella or seen the movie in about 16 years, I will abstain from voting because I agree with a lot of Brian's analysis and perhaps that means both versions warrant another experience.
• 19:15
  Speaker A: You can also just turn it off before the shot on the beach or just close your eyes because you want to hear it still, you want to hear the rest of it. You just don't just need not see that once he's on the when you See him on the.
• 19:25
  Speaker B: On the bus.
• 19:26
  Speaker A: On the bus. Just close your eyes and listen to the rest of the movie. It's fine. The last, like, 30 seconds, it's fine.
• 19:33
  Speaker B: We just pretend that the beach part never happened. But I think that is a very measured response that perhaps both versions need to be revisited. And Cat's last note is as an additional note before I go. The writing in this is so good that I remember some lines, even though I've only read it once. The minute Brian began ramping up to the Sisters, I wish I could tell you that Andy fought the good fight, came to the front of my brain as clear and as sudden as when you eat a comfort food you haven't had since being a child.
• 20:08
  Speaker A: I wonder how much of that is really. And I'm genuinely curious because I don't know how much you've seen versus having read the book. It sounds like you've read the book, you know, or the book sticks in your brain more vividly than the movie. But I do wonder, because it's Morgan Freeman saying all those lines in the movie, like, this is the movie that, like, made his voiceover. Like, the narration. Like, that kicked off his whole, like, the Morgan Freeman voice.
• 20:33
  Speaker B: His career of being Morgan Freeman.
• 20:35
  Speaker A: Yeah. Like, he was obviously a famous actor and stuff and had been in a ton of stuff, but I think this was, like, the big movie in terms of. Because he does the voiceover for all of it, the narration for all of it, that the gravitas of his voice talking over something became this big, kind of memed itself into the general consciousness of everybody. And so I do wonder how much of that is the reason those lines stick in your head versus having read them. I don't know. Like I said, if you've only seen the movie once, but you've read the book a handful of times or whatever, then it probably is just from having the book. But I would be. I would bet that there's at least some level of like, because that is, to me, what. As I was reading the book, all I could hear was Morgan Freeman's voice doing every line I was reading. Like, it's. It literally, I. I couldn't help but hear his voice reading all these lines. And that is what, like, really sticks in my brain. So, anyway, it's interesting.
• 21:35
  Speaker B: And then we had one vote for the movie and two votes for the book on Instagram, as well as one for the movie and zero for the book on Threads. And then on Goodreads, we had one vote for the movie, zero for the book. And we had a comment from Mikko who said, I'm in a similar situation where I've seen the movie in bits and pieces multiple times before, but only now read the novella. I think the movie expands on the right parts of the story and I like pretty much all of the tweaks the film makes. Maybe a hollowed out book is a bit too big of a cliche, but the salvation lies within line has always felt so on the nose to me, especially when the hammer could have easily been stored in the tunnel itself. But that's a nitpick.
• 22:24
  Speaker A: That's true. Like, he easily could have stored it in the tunnel and been way less conspicuous.
• 22:29
  Speaker B: Right.
• 22:30
  Speaker A: Or likely to be found, like. Cause if they find the tunnel, like, it doesn't matter, you know, like the rock, you know?
• 22:35
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 22:36
  Speaker A: So I agree. But who cares?
• 22:40
  Speaker B: But satisfying.
• 22:41
  Speaker A: Dude, there's nothing more fun than something stored in a book where the pages cut out in the shape of that thing. Come on.
• 22:48
  Speaker B: And it's perfectly cut out in the shape of that thing.
• 22:52
  Speaker A: It's the best.
• 22:53
  Speaker B: And Miko went on to say, the book is not bad, but the movie is better, mainly because it fleshes out the side characters or combines them so they aren't just one time mentions. And so the focus isn't quite so narrowly on Andy. So our winner this week was the movie, with 12 votes to the book's four, plus our two listeners who couldn't decide.
• 23:15
  Speaker A: Fantastic. All right, Katie, what did you think of the movie?
• 23:18
  Speaker B: I thought it was really good.
• 23:20
  Speaker A: Okay.
• 23:20
  Speaker B: I really liked it.
• 23:21
  Speaker A: Okay. I wasn't sure. I think I've said this before, but I genuinely can never tell while watching a movie what you think of it. You don't react at all.
• 23:29
  Speaker B: It's the only time I have a podcast.
• 23:31
  Speaker A: You have. No, like, I never. I genuinely am, like, maybe she hates it. Maybe. I don't know. I literally. I can read your mood, like all the other time. Always. But when we're watching a movie, I feel like I have zero insight into whether or not you were enjoying the movie. It's fascinating to me. I don't know. But yeah, no. Okay. Yeah, it's really good. There you go. Fair enough. All of that build up just for that.
• 23:57
  Speaker B: Why?
• 23:57
  Speaker A: No, there's nothing you don't understand.
• 23:59
  Speaker B: Anything else that is interesting, though? That. Cause I've never really thought about how I react to movies. Yeah.
• 24:06
  Speaker A: Cause you don't react. I think.
• 24:08
  Speaker B: Yeah. I'm taking it in.
• 24:09
  Speaker A: Yeah. I don't know. It's interesting.
• 24:10
  Speaker B: Is that why you found it so upsetting when I was uncontrollably crying when we tried to watch Ghost Story.
• 24:18
  Speaker A: No, it was just the fact that you were uncontrollably sobbing the whole time. What do you mean? It wasn't because, oh, I can't believe I can tell what emotion she's experiencing right now. No, it was because, oh, the emotion you're experiencing is misery. Like, I don't. That's. That was a different thing. Yeah. Yeah. All right, that is it. For what everybody had to say. Thank you all for all of your comments about the Shawshank Redemption. Really appreciate it. Always fun to see what you have to say. Katie, it's time to now to learn a little bit about the Scorch Trials.
• 24:59
  Speaker B: I think it's safe to say the Maze Trials were a complete success. It's too soon. But they could be the key to everything.
• 25:08
  Speaker A: It's time now to begin phase two. Welcome to the Scorch. The world outside is hanging on by a very thin thread. Beyond this door lies the beginning of your new lives. Hey, Thomas. We weren't the only maze. Do you remember about Wicked? I remember they sent me into the maze. I remember watching my friends die in front of me. Don't you want to understand? Understand what? Why this all happened? I just need to know. Whose side are you on?
• 25:45
  Speaker B: And it is, in fact, going to be a little bit about the Scorch Trials. The Scorch Trials is a 2010 young adult novel by American author James Dashner, and it is the second book in the Maze Runner trilogy. And that's the main trilogy, not counting the other books, which were apparently prequels and not follow ups to the first three books. And I couldn't find any additional facts about this book. The Wikipedia article is basically just a plot summary. So I did find a 2015 interview with James Dashner from right before this movie movie came out in which he talked more about his writing process of envisioning a movie as he's writing.
• 26:38
  Speaker A: Yeah, you mentioned that in the first episode. Yeah, apparently the only thing he's ever talked about, I guess.
• 26:45
  Speaker B: And he said, quote, every scene I ever write, I envision it as if it were a movie. It's not that I'm literally writing this because I want it to become a film. It's just how my process works. I see a lot of movies and listen to a lot of movie soundtracks. I see it as cinematically and then try to get that onto the page. Maybe that's why it translated so well into a movie. I'm not sure what an interview. And then I included this other quote from that same interview because it was, like, tangentially related. He's talking about this film, the Scorch Trials. He said, quote, the second movie has more differences than the first one. Did you feel almost like someone has been mean to your child or something, but then you quickly get over it? What's fun for me, and I keep trying to tell my readers. That cracked me up.
• 27:44
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 27:44
  Speaker B: Is that the experience is fine.
• 27:47
  Speaker A: Please stop complaining to me about the changes they made. Please.
• 27:49
  Speaker B: Can't do anything about it.
• 27:51
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 27:53
  Speaker B: Is that the experience I'm having is something that you would think to be impossible. I feel like I'm experiencing my books for the first time through these movies, which is something you would never guess you'd be able to do again. It's been fantastic.
• 28:06
  Speaker A: I actually can. Totally. That's.
• 28:08
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 28:09
  Speaker A: Like, that's what every adaptation is.
• 28:10
  Speaker B: I think that's nice. Like, you know, it's nice.
• 28:13
  Speaker A: That's a good way to view it.
• 28:14
  Speaker B: The part about. The part about him keep, like, trying to tell his readers that just. That took me out when I read that it did.
• 28:23
  Speaker A: The journey I've gone on over the years with adaptations specifically from doing this show. But I used to be, like, I was the person, and Harry Potter's my big one. So I have to reference this just because I've read Harry Potter every year. I used to. I haven't read him since we did it on the show, but I used to read Harry Potter literally every year. It was my favorite book series as a kid. I was obsessed with it. And when the movies came out, I liked the first couple or whatever. And we've talked about these all in those episodes. But I hated the fourth movie. I don't even think I liked the third movie at the time when they came out. And I hated the fourth movie because of all the things they cut or whatever. And that journey of going from somebody who views adaptations as. And I've mentioned this, I think the other day, I still lurk in the Harry Potter subreddit. Cause it's one of the most fascinating, fascinating ecosystems of people, like, imaginable. Like the people that still engage with the Harry Potter subreddit.
• 29:20
  Speaker B: Yeah.
• 29:21
  Speaker A: Fascinating because of everything. And so I, like, lurk on there and just like to, like, you know.
• 29:28
  Speaker B: Sometimes you send me screenshots into that.
• 29:30
  Speaker A: World and I'm like, good. Fascinating. Yeah, it's fascinating in, like, a. Watching a car accident kind of way. Because most of the people still involved are, you know, it's most of the mother of a lot of the more well meaning people have left the fandom, shall we say, or the more introspective, contemplative, empathetic people have left the fandom or at least don't engage with in the same way like us. Like me. I, yeah, you know, I still, the Harry Potter books still mean something to me from my childhood, but I do not engage with that content in the way, you know, like at all again, other than lurking on the subreddit because it's just fascinating like to me I'm like, it feels like a nature observe, like documentary.
• 30:09
  Speaker B: Yeah, you're like the Jane Goodall of the Harry Potter fan.
• 30:12
  Speaker A: It's just really, really interesting reading some of the threads about. But anyways, but a big thing in that thread all the time is it always comes up because the new series coming out or whatever and like threads pop up every single day about like what, what are they gonna build? And every comment is just from every single person that it has like hundreds of upvotes is just what I want is an identical, every single word of the book translated directly and identically from the book onto the screen. And I just like, I used to have that perspective when I was like 16 or whatever and like when these movies were coming out. And maybe all the people in there are young. I don't know, maybe most of the fandom fans on the subreddit are, you know, younger people. I have no idea how old they are, but to me that is just such a weird way to view adaptations. It's an adaptation. You are adapting it. The idea of wanting like every single element to be identical to the book is so boring to me that I like even in a book like this where it's like, I think it's a good book and like they kept a lot of it very similar. It's still more interesting to me to look at the places they changed and why. Yeah, you know what I mean? Like, it's just, I. And it's so weird that. Not weird. I understand it because like I said, I used to be like that. It's just so fascinating to me that there is a group of people and it's a large group of people in fandoms that are just like death grip holding on to like it has to be exactly like, it's just, I don't.
• 31:45
  Speaker B: Know, I, I can be, I can be sympathetic to wanting something like that. Like when you really love a property that much. I can be sympathetic to the idea of like wanting to See, Exactly. All of the things that you love.
• 32:01
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 32:01
  Speaker B: Translated onto the screen, like. Right. You know, I can. I can be sympathetic to that. I don't want that.
• 32:08
  Speaker A: No.
• 32:08
  Speaker B: Because I agree with you. I don't think it's particularly interesting. And I think that this show is kind of a good. Has been kind of a good case study on that. Because I think some of our least interesting episodes are the ones where the movie has been very, very, very faithful to the book. And there's just not a whole lot to talk about.
• 32:36
  Speaker A: Yeah. And, you know, everybody can enjoy media however they want it, but it's just such a, to me. Boring way to engage with any media, even if something you really love. I'm trying to think. And maybe it's that because my engagement with fandom has changed so much over the years that I don't have sacred cows like I did when I was.
• 32:55
  Speaker B: Don't really.
• 32:56
  Speaker A: Maybe I may. And maybe this is. Maybe it's a little judgmental, but that does feel kind of like an immature thing to like. Maybe not immature, but it's a. It's a thing. I will say this. It's a thing that I identified with when I was more immature. I don't know if it's universally an immature thing. I don't want to say that necessarily, but that. That, like, attachment to. Like having being so attached to some specific property or book series or whatever, that somebody adapting it, changing elements of it in a way that they think tells a story better or in a different interesting way. Being, like, mad about that is so. Again, and I've been there. I. I went through that stage of my life, but it's so such a boring way to engage with.
• 33:41
  Speaker B: And I do. Like. I want to clarify that we're talking about just the. The sheer state of having made a change.
• 33:53
  Speaker A: Yes.
• 33:53
  Speaker B: Regardless of outrage at a change, that change isn't good.
• 33:57
  Speaker A: You can you. Yes. If you want to argue. Because we argue about terror, we emotionally, like, we get very charged up about changes that we think are bad and dumb. That's not what I'm saying.
• 34:06
  Speaker B: And there are definitely books that have gotten adaptations that I wish would have gotten a different adaptation because I didn't like what the movie did with it. But I think that's different from just getting upset at that.
• 34:20
  Speaker A: It's.
• 34:21
  Speaker B: That it has been at all different at all.
• 34:24
  Speaker A: Yes. That there's any difference from. Again, I cannot stress enough, and I'm specifically relating to this Harry Potter fandom, but I think it's pretty ubiquitous across a lot of Fandoms where every single comment is just, I want every single scene from the book identically to how I envisioned it or to how it reads in the book put on the screen. And it's like, no, why? Again, there are times where that can work in this book. There are scenes in this book that are translated directly that it's like, yeah, that makes sense. But like you're changing mediums and also you're adapting a story for a different time frame usually than when it was written. And it's just, it makes no sense to directly translate a story in that way. And I, Yeah, I don't know, I just find it so boring to have that knee jerk reaction to the idea of change versus, again, debate all you want about whether or not changes were good. That's the whole point of the show. Like we do that every single episode.
• 35:20
  Speaker B: Hey, that's our bread and butter.
• 35:21
  Speaker A: So I have no. Yeah, there are things where I'm like, why would you change that? That's dumb and bad to change it the way you did. But. But there are plenty of times, obviously there's a whole where those changes are better and make for a more interesting movie. And this would be a good example of it where ultimately I thought the changes that the movie made were better in a lot of ways than what the book did. I was just actually trying to think, is there anything I still have that I would feel that way about? Oh, how dare they change. And I just don't. I can't think of what that would even be. I just don't. I think it's because I don't have that same sort of like, passionate, like.
• 35:58
  Speaker B: Yeah, I don't have the same sort.
• 36:01
  Speaker A: Of like attachment to anything.
• 36:02
  Speaker B: Yeah. Reverence for really any media anymore.
• 36:09
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 36:11
  Speaker B: And honestly, I'm fine with that.
• 36:14
  Speaker A: Yeah.
• 36:14
  Speaker B: Like, that feels like one of those things that like, like there's a part of me that feels like, oh, I should be upset by that because I've like lost something.
• 36:24
  Speaker A: It feels like you've lost some level of like, passion or whatever. But I don't think that's the case. I feel more passionate about stories than I ever have. Like, personally, like, I feel more engaged with and passionate about different stories than I ever did when I was, you know, 20 or 16 or 17 or whatever. And the Harry Potter movies were coming out and I was furious that, that they didn't include that they changed fucking Dobby from Dobby to Neville. Giving Harry the fucking whatever in the fourth book. Like, I was really mad about that, but it didn't mean anything and it didn't matter. And like, why? And like. And like. And so I don't have that sort of like. Yeah, like you said, I don't have that. That deep seated passion or like attachment to any like, book or movie or series or whatever. But I do. And so, yeah, like you said, that almost feels like a loss of passion for something.
• 37:20
  Speaker B: Feels like a loss of something. But I think it is net good.
• 37:23
  Speaker A: Yes. And like I said, I think I'm more passionate about the stuff we cover than I would have been then because I think I actually engage with it now. Whereas then it was just like a. Well, I think then it was a toy that I coveted. Now it's like a piece of. Of media or literature that I actually engage with.
• 37:44
  Speaker B: Yeah, I think that engaging with it in that way of like when you're immature and you just want everything to be exactly the same as it is in the book. I think it's just a surface level way of engaging with something and it doesn't produce any kind of deeper meaning or extra thought or any kind of emotion really, other than like surface level emotions.
• 38:13
  Speaker A: Yeah, I agree.
• 38:15
  Speaker B: Anyways, well, that went a place that I wasn't expecting.
• 38:17
  Speaker A: It was a whole tangent. But yeah, that was fun. We had a short one. It was a short prequel, so we. We needed something to fill this up.
• 38:23
  Speaker B: Consider that like a bonus. A bonus Learning things, Chatting with Us segment.
• 38:29
  Speaker A: Philosophizing with. This film is lit. All right, that is it for the Scorch Trials, the book. Time now to learn a little bit about the Scorch Trials, the movie. They're hiding something. Come on. You don't know that. They lied to us. We never escaped. It's all just been part of their plan. What do they want from us, Thomas? The maze is one thing. The two kids wouldn't last one day.
• 38:54
  Speaker B: Out in the Scorch.
• 39:04
  Speaker A: What the hell? The course of your lives will determine the course of humanity into light or darkness. The Scorch Trials is a 2014 filmed and I guess.
• 39:31
  Speaker B: 2015.
• 39:31
  Speaker A: Sorry, I guess it's. The Maze Runner. The Scorch Trials. I don't know how the movie is officially branded.
• 39:36
  Speaker B: I think the movie is officially branded as the Maze Runner. The Scorch Trials. Because they needed that name recognition.
• 39:43
  Speaker A: So. The Maze Runner. The Scorch Trials is a 2015 film directed by West Ball, known for the Maze Runner series, Kingdom, Planet of the Apes, and he's currently tapped to direct the Legend of Zelda movie that they're working on. And this one was written just by T.S. nolan, who did all of the Maze Runner movies, Pacific Uprising and the Atom Project, among others. And we'll get to why here in a second. The film stars Dylan o' Brien, Kaya Scodelario, Thomas Brody Sangster, Dexter Darden, Natalie Emanuel, Giancarlo Esposito, Alexander Flores, Aiden Gillen, He Kong Lee, Jacob Laughlin, Catherine McNamara, Barry Pepper, Rosa Salazar, Lily Taylor, Alan Tudyk, and Patricia Clarkson. It has a 48% on Rotten Tomatoes, a 43% on Metacritic, and a 6.3 out of 10 on IMDb. For reference, because I always do this with our summer series. The first movie had a 66 on Rotten Tomatoes.
• 40:39
  Speaker B: Oh, no.
• 40:40
  Speaker A: So a 14 drop. No, sorry, 16 drop. The first movie had a 57 on Metacritic, so a 14% drop there to the second one. And a 6.8 out of 10 on IMDb. So a half point drop on IMDb. So down across the board, unfortunately.
• 40:56
  Speaker B: Great.
• 40:57
  Speaker A: And it made 312 million against a budget of 61 million, which was very similar to the first movie, except the first movie had a budget of only like 38 million, but it made a similar amount of money. So production on the Scorch Trials actually began a year before the release of the first film. They basically greenlit the work on the sequel before the first movie ever even came out. And T.S. nolan, who had worked on the first film, he had a writing credit on the first film, but he took over soul writing responsibilities from Noah Oppenheim, who wrote the first movie. On September 26, 2014, Aiden Gillen was announced as Jansen, aka Rat man, because I didn't know who Jansen was, but rap Rat Man. And that is great, because. Do you know, you know who Aiden Gillan is? Do you know who Aiden Gillan is?
• 41:43
  Speaker B: Not off the top of my head.
• 41:44
  Speaker A: He's Little Fish in Game of Thrones.
• 41:48
  Speaker B: Okay. Yeah, he does look like a rat.
• 41:49
  Speaker A: Yeah. There's actually several Game of Thrones people that make an appearance. Obviously, Thomas Brody. This is a fun fact that I didn't include here, I don't think, But Thomas Brody Sangster is in Game of Thrones. Aiden Gillan obviously was in Game of Thrones. And then Natalie Emanuel was also in Game of Thrones. She's. I can't remember her name, but she's the slave girl that Daenerys.
• 42:11
  Speaker B: Oh, yeah.
• 42:12
  Speaker A: Becomes like Daenerys. Like. Yeah. But those three were in Game of Thrones together before this movie came out. But they never actually had met because they never. All of Their.
• 42:22
  Speaker B: Oh, yeah, they're all in, like, they're.
• 42:23
  Speaker A: All in different parts of the world. So they literally never had films together until this movie.
• 42:28
  Speaker B: It's fun.
• 42:28
  Speaker A: Yeah. So as production got rolling, I thought, this is interesting. West Ball told buzzfeed that, quote, we've got stages, we've got crews coming in. Dylan will be back in a few weeks. We're building sets and the script is being written. It's a bit of a race this time because we're cautiously optimistic, but we're feeling excited. We're about to do something that's way more sophisticated, way more grown up and set up a saga here.
• 42:50
  Speaker B: Oh, boy.
• 42:51
  Speaker A: It's way more sophisticated. Is it? Is it gonna be way more sophisticated? Maybe. We'll see.
• 42:56
  Speaker B: Well, we'll be the judge of that.
• 42:58
  Speaker A: And then my last note before we get to reviews here. And Katie, you shared this on social media the other day, but it was the second IMDb trivia fact, which I thought was very funny. And there was really not much very interesting in the IMDb trivia for this one, which often happens for the second movies for whatever reason. But the inv. Trivia fact number two, the plot, facts and characters from the movie are wildly different than from the book, including the story arc, the flair and character backstory and development, end quote. You posted on Social. I sent you that and I was like, great. Amazing. This is gonna be a nightmare to untangle, I have a feeling. But, yeah, probably. We shall see. And then finally getting to some reviews from Forbes. They said that the film suffered quote from middle movie syndro because it did not offer an introduction nor a finale. The rap said, quote, it doesn't offer much plot or character development, end quote. Stephen Kelly for Total Film said, quote, scorch Trials ambitiously opens up its world with mixed results. Gripping action. So. So script, end quote. And Walter Adigio. Adiago. I don't know how to pronounce. I'm sorry, I don't know how to say that name. Walter Adigio Adigo. Eddie Ego of the San Francisco Chronicle said, quote, there's lots of eye candy and the pace is fast, but somehow the movie falls short. End quote.
• 44:19
  Speaker B: Ugh. So excited.
• 44:20
  Speaker A: However, some critics considered it to be an improvement over the predecessor, specifically hiding highlighting the action sequences and performances. John Williams, different John Williams writing for the New York. I assume. A different John Williams, I assume. I don't think he was doing Moonlighting doing movie reviews for the New York Times, but maybe John Williams for the New York Times said, quote, the many chases and ludicrous narrow escapes offer respectable doses of adrenaline. End quote. That's not really a positive view. That's like one line about how some of the action scenes are fun. Writing for USA Today, Brian Truitt said, quote, maze runners, action, suspense and twists give more movie fans of all ages a chance to embrace their inner on the run teenager. End quote. Also not really.
• 44:59
  Speaker B: I don't, I don't know if I have one of those.
• 45:02
  Speaker A: Yeah. Rafer Guzman, writing for Newsday, said, quote, the teen dystopian franchise continues to play rough and now even rougher with satisfying results. End quote. And finally, writing for Vulture, Bill Jabiri wrote, quote, essentially the Scorch Trials makes up for the humdrum apocalypse of its first half by going a little bonkers in its second. End quote.
• 45:24
  Speaker B: I don't know if any of those were really positive.
• 45:27
  Speaker A: No. I feel like somebody on Wikipedia who wrote some critics because I copy pasted that from which I always just copy paste everybody.
• 45:36
  Speaker B: Somebody went and found some poll quotes that made it sound a little more positive than they were. Perhaps, Maybe not. But it seems like.
• 45:47
  Speaker A: Yeah, as always, you can do us a favor by heading over to Facebook, Instagram threads, Goodreads, Blue Sky, Follow us on social media. Engage with us. We'd love to hear from you. You can also support us over@patreon.com thisfilm film is lit. Get access to bonus content and all that kind of good stuff there.
• 46:01
  Speaker B: And if you are following us, we would love to have you weigh in on the word for word adaptation philosophy.
• 46:11
  Speaker A: Yes, chime in on our mid episode discussion here.
• 46:15
  Speaker B: Let us know what you think.
• 46:16
  Speaker A: Yeah, yeah. And you can also help us out by dropping us a five star rating and writing us a nice little review over on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or wherever you listen to our show. Katie, where can people watch the Scorch Trials?
• 46:30
  Speaker B: Well, as always, you can check with your local library. We have procured a Blu ray copy from our local library or if you still have a local video rental store, you can check with them. Otherwise, this is unfortunately not streaming with a subscription anywhere, but you can rent it for around $4 from Amazon, Apple TV, YouTube or Fandango at home.
• 46:58
  Speaker A: Fantastic. I don't know if I'm excited. We'll see. I'm 100 pages into the book and it's, it's the same so far. Like I feel similarly to the first.
• 47:08
  Speaker B: I mean I, I'm also around 100 pages in and I, I do feel a little less frustrated.
• 47:15
  Speaker A: Yes.
• 47:16
  Speaker B: Because everyone is just confused and it's not like Thomas is confused and everyone else is refusing to give him information.
• 47:25
  Speaker A: I agree.
• 47:25
  Speaker B: Everyone's just confused. So I'm just confused with them and like it's less annoying. Yeah I don't know if it's better but it's less annoying.
• 47:34
  Speaker A: It's less annoying that's for sure but it's very similar experience so far but I haven't in a similar way the first one I haven't found it bit like completely obnoxious to read so far it's fine. I'm interested to see what happens but it's. I. I haven't felt like in 100 pages I haven't felt like we have a. That we've upgraded like the character development or anything really like it feels very similar in that regard so far we'll see. All right, come back in one week's time. We're talking about the Scorch trials Until that time, guys, gals, not binary pals and everybody else keep reading books, keep watching of movies and keep being awesome.