Was NPH better than Jim Carrey as Count Olaf?

Was NPH better than Jim Carrey as Count Olaf?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=pT9CJtQSagw
youtube.com/watch?v=-fPT8ojGU10
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Yeah I think so.

Despite all his quipping (which I personally like), he's more subtle and creepy. Just look at his interactions with Violet. He doesn't just want her for the fortune.

Jim Carrey was just Jim Carrey as Olaf. NPH at least attempts to act, even if it's overacting.

I tried watching this with some friends and we lasted about 7 minutes. That was some Lost tier cgi

The whole point of Olaf's character in the first few books is overracting. He starts gaining complexity and subtlety much later.

The first 2 episodes? Yeah it was bad especially with Sunny.

It's a good show you're seriously missing out.

I get that they had to in scenes like with her being tied up, but why couldn't they just leave the baby as she is? Same with the baby noises.

The bad cgi kind of added to the charm, in my opinion

I can't stand to look at NPH as Olaf. He looks like a young man with makeup. The makeup is so obvious. It's terrible.

Jim Carrey blended in with the maeup way better.

He's not an old man though.

>muh graphics
End yourself.

I think NPH was an absolutely stellar Olaf

You're supposed to underrate him. You're supposed to think he's a buffoon. And you're also supposed to think, "wait... what is this guy really capable of?"

And NPH captures that perfectly

I liked the aesthetic, it was nostalgic, like an old Tim Burton film or Dr Seuss

gee whiz you and your friends are such an incredibly impressive group of learned individuals

how do you stand being on this earth? golly

I don't know, they're both fantastic.

I have only watched the first 6 episodes, but overall I'd say I prefer the film to the show. That said, NPH probably deserves more praise - his Captain Sham disguise was fantastic, and he had to do it for much longer than Carrey.

>Was
This isn't wookiepedia

Jim Carrey's mannerisms are too distinctive for me to see him as Count Olaf. It's like I was watching the mask or something. So I think NPH edges him out slightly.

Alright, I was an absolute fan of the book series as a kid (probably one of the only book series I feel is without flaw until the last two books.) and I certainly believe that the creators of the show were avid fans of the book series, but the tone is so incredibly wrong from how Snicket had it that it just feels off for me. The worst offender for this is the music that turns some of the most memorable scenes like the house from the wide window's collapse into something comedic. On top of that, I understand the books frequently did it, but the narration constantly reminding the viewers that their lives are shit is just sometimes a little too much. Every few episodes could work, but in some Snicket says expresses this 3 or 4 times with useless narration for the plot.

The worst thing I think is that it underplays the significance of each character and often voices conversations in a strange way. Using the Wide Window again, the way they talk to their aunt seems like they are reading prewritten lines with no expression of fear and dread like how it was in the books. Count Olaf's problem for me is he seems cartoonishly evil instead of a malevolent and powerful force that has absolutely no concern for anything and anyone that gets in his way.

I'm hoping the planned scenario is to dive deeper into the tone (especially with the vile village) with the each season.

Tbh olaf is supposed to be hammy and quip poorly

>an actor that overacts plays an actor that overacts
What's the problem with Jim Carrey?

youtube.com/watch?v=pT9CJtQSagw

Remember, there are those who start the fires, and there are those who put them out

Are we getting books 5-8 in S2? That's when the series finally gits gud.

He's a good Olaf, but they're using him terribly. And the theatre troupe.

All of these disguises sucked complete and total ass. In the books, nobody knew the Doctor/Nurse in The Reptile Room was a troupe member in disguise until the very end.

got to say as someone who hasn't seen anything else of NPH, he was a 5/10 at best. they didn't really pull off making him feel creepy and the third wall jokes were cringeworthy

fourth wall*

While I liked the troupe as a whole in the show, I thought it was better in the books he only had 1 or 2 members with him at a time when he was in disguise.

>took this long for someone to post Milana
has Sup Forums changed?

You should give them the benefit of the doubt. It's harder to disguise someone on film than in a book. Plus, having already read the book, you already know it's them. You know what you're looking for.

My 2 biggest problems with the series are
1.) Showing that the parents are still alive. It completely missed the point of the books. The books just hinted that ONE of the parents MIGHT be alive. And they didn't even hint at it until far into the series. Revealing they are alive, and in the very first episode, ruins a lot of the show for me.
2.) The stupid anachronistic jokes. The two I remember are the joke Olaf made about ordering something online when the bank was shown using typewriters and the completely out of place Uber joke the baby made when they were talking about taxis. It's supposed to be the 30s/40s right? It totally ruined my immersion.

>Showing that the parents are still alive.
But whose parents are they?

>It's supposed to be the 30s/40s right?
no, it's victorian inspired but relatively close to modern.

This is some weak bait

post her feet

>y-y-y-you're too dumb to get this poorly produced nostalgia grab!

I read the books when I was a kid, not everything can make the transition to film or television, nor does everything need to.

>openly leering at a 14 year old

Wtf was Netflix thinking? Does this happen in the book?

no because browning a best

Stick Neils head on a very tall thin body, make Olaf a little less goofy and he'd be perfect.

I ways pictured Olaf being very tall and he's drawn as such.

I unironically watched Fuller House and they broke the fourth wall a lot too. Did Netflix do that with any other shows?

The show captures a more or less identical tone to the books. The only real divergence is the emphasis on VFD/Conspiracies happens earlier making the early books into much more of a mystery than the adventure novels that they started out as.

Olaf is always cartoonishly evil, you were just a child when you read the books. If you re-read them now you'll see it's virtually identical to how it's presented in the show.

This, Olaf was only competent or threatening because everyone else was fucking stupid.

THAT footpussy

Nope
everything else was better though

House of Cards. Netflix probably wanted that in their newer shows.

Oh right, I forgot about the Quagmire triplets. That'd be a good twist.

>78655443
>I haven't finished watching the series yet

I still feel like that online joke stood out too much. And that Uber joke didn't fit at all.

Yeah they were definitely weak, and even in the context of having everything be weird and anachronistic I feel like the Uber joke was too trendy and hip for it's own good
I thought the wordplay and overall humor was generally good though

I never realized till just now how much I want a Tim Burton Dr. Suess movie.

I think uber pays Netflix for product placement. Why else would kimmie Schmidt be an uber driver?

...

>He doesn't just want her for the fortune.

This is 100% contrary to the book Count Olaf and is a horrible interpretation of the character.

He's a selfish fuck who wants their fortune, nothing else.

No it isn't, it's been years but I clearly remember him wanting to dick her down.

He was a creep towards her in the book. The book scene for pic related he strokes her hair.

>that part where Olaf teachs Violet about cunnilingus

jesus, I would've thought Raimi wrote those books.

watch it pedos

Jerry and George were openly leering at a 15 year old in Seinfeld

Did anyone else notice Olaf was just copying Bane's voice in the 3rd story when he was playing a sea captain?

>baiting milana pics

>>baiting milana pics

w-what did he mean by this?

i c wat ur doing

>as a kid
I feel so old. I was already in my mid-teens when the first book came out.

Patrick Warburton played a perfect Lemony Snicket
Neil Patrick Harris played a perfect Count Olaf
Aasif Mandvi played a perfect Uncle Monty
The show is definitely better than the movie. 9/10

It could be that they blew all of their budget on the sets, etc. But I think they made the cgi look campy that way to make it more cartoonish, like the books felt.

>and I certainly believe that the creators of the show were avid fans of the book series, but the tone is so incredibly wrong from how Snicket had it that it just feels off for me
you do know that daniel handler himself is an executive producer and wrote 6 of the 8 episodes, right? He has his hands all of this show, so I'm sure that this is exactly how he wanted the books to be adapted.

Season 2 is going to be 10 episodes, books 5-9 two episodes each.
Then Season 3 will be the rest of the books, twp episodes each.

...

Either way, nice lips.

>Soul Asylum's "Misery" begins to play

>born March 12, 2003

>Patrick Warburton played a perfect Lemony Snicket
Somehow I never imagined these words would ever be formed. And yet, he nailed that melancholy.

gonna rape u qt

>as Olaf
Carrey was better. He played Olaf as a pretentious, uptight twat and I think it worked. NPH just comes off as NPH wth only a slight dramatic enunciation in his voice.

>as disguises
NPH. He plays the characters as stereotypes or celebrity impressions, as if Olaf's only approach to acting is aping shit he's seen in movies.

at first it was really jarring, but after i got used to it, it really jived well with the whole atmosphere of the show.

I think it helps that it's never particularly subtle, so that after a while it doesn't register as cheap CGI so much as it does that the world is just cartoony like that, and it's somewhat covered by the excellent sets

How can so many people like this show? It's just so fucking boring and all the humour and acting is flat.
The books and movie was better.

>The books and movie was better.
"The books and the movie WERE better."

No, that conveys a different idea.

As in, the books and the movie together as a single unit.
Consuming both the books and the movie together was superior to just watching the show.

>Patrick Warburton played a perfect Lemony Snicket
>Neil Patrick Harris played a perfect Count Olaf
>Aasif Mandvi played a perfect Uncle Monty
>The show is definitely better than the movie. 9/10
But the film was also perfectly cast, whilst having a phenomenal soundtrack, and a distinct visual style, that was actually gothic to to along with the books.

I think you both mean "ARE"

love netflix viral marketing/shill threads

I'm only halfway through the Netflix series but I still have very mixed thoughts about it.

There are definitely characters I feel that were better explored in the show than the movie (Monty, Poe, Strauss, Olaf's henchman), but most of that is simply complimented by having more time to spare for them.

A lot of the CG insofar ranges from average to horrible. The first episode alone has a bunch of very uncanny valley shots that take me out of the mood in a way that's frustrating. I can understand that the Netflix show may have a more tight budget than the movie but at the same time there could've been better ways to go about the same scenes that required CG shots

There's definitely times where going word for word in the story works entirely fine, and then the delivery of word-for-word just comes off as especially wooden. Klaus especially just seems flat

The tone seems viciously uneven. There's episodes that feel produced like a comedy, others not. Plus some of the new lines and setpieces feel extraordinarily out of place.

NPH as Olaf just lacks the charisma of Carrey's Olaf. Also physically speaking I feel NPH doesn't resemble Olaf more than he does a younger Ross Perot. I know many would say Carrey's Olaf is just another very run of the mill Carrey character, but there's a way that he's able to work around a script both physically and verbally that makes it feel a little more natural than NPH in those awkward prosthetics and frustratingly dull lines.

Lastly, the conspiracy theory stuff feels way too early to show this hard this fast. A big part of the books was to let it unravel so it allowed you to appreciate it later, none of the VFD drops seem slick and it feels borderline shoehorned just to throw Will Arnett at the last 4 minutes of every episode. I understand the original writer came back to help work on the project but Harry Potter threads never excuse JK Rowling fucking up crucial things and retconning shit past the original ending of the series.

I started rewatching the movie, and man, it doesn't hold up. I liked it as a kid, but Carrey is the only part that holds up at all, and most of that is just his natural comedic talent rather than the script.

NPH finally getting another hit show.

is this show supposed to be funny? legit question because I can't tell

Netflix is getting a little cheeky

I disagree - I watched it again recently when it was on TV, and I loved it. I mean maybe it's nostalgia, but I think it's one of the best family films out there.
At the very least it gave us this
youtube.com/watch?v=-fPT8ojGU10

nice bumps, netflix shills

I'll never get over how many commercials we're forced to watch now. When I was kid we would only see 2 or 3 but now it's at the least 7 or 8 commercials.

Why would a Netflix shill say the movie is better than the show?

i want to know too cause this shit was so fucking boring

Of course it's meant to be funny - it's a black comedy.

The kids aging too quickly is gonna be their biggest challenge.

The baby parts are so cringe worthy. Especially that log scene. Other than that I like it. There's shit all else to watch unless you are a capeshit fan.

Then why are all the actors white?

>"""""""""""""white""""""""""""

nice mouthpussy too

Am I the only one who remembers the books being way darker than this? Granted I was really young but I remember being disturbed whereas the series never really goes there.

The TV show isn't gothic like hte books and film, and the way it handles some scenes (particuarly the collapsing house) is just ridiculous with no tension.

But the books weren't much darker no. People used to always complain about the film not being dark like the books, and I can't understand why. The books were written for children, so they're obviously not very dark (though do get darker as they go along). They are gothic-black comedies, the show just forgets the gothic part for some reason.

Did you even read the books? He doesn't just want the fortune. He wants revenge. The Baudelaire parents destroyed his life and he wants to destroy everyone they loved in return.

man i wanted to punch this guy in face so much by the end, i know its for the story but fuck how can one person be so stupid

He does have a bit before that where he looks at the camera saying that

>overacting.
It's a show made for kids. Everybody is overacting.
And no I'm not saying that as a negative.