Nope, that submission is wrong. In the movie they did not arrive in the meteor shower (as previously stated here), and in the book the origin is never explicitly stated.
If you’re gonna link to something make sure it’s authoritative first. :rolleyes:
I actually also remember the 60's film intro narration.
"This is a newcomer, Triffidus Selectus, brought to Earth on a meteor shower during, the day of the Triffids!!!"
Well, clearly it was fundamental to this adaptation because of the explicit flashbacks (which just annoyed the hell out of me...) so it was obvious that it was central to the story. I just think they've ruined a good story as the book was really good.
I just hope the people who enjoyed this adaptation read the book now as they will be missing out.
I agree. A blindingly good novel. An sf author, might have been JG Ballard, not sure, said it was a disaster movie in an English country garden where they go on holiday to the Isle of Wight afterwards. Probably sour grapes (or triffids).
No, they weren't blind - just ALREADY "stung" So the waiting Triffids - who don't have eyes, remember? (can't SEE you're actually standing upright...) - can sense the poison and think you've been stung....to death....and are laying there decomposing until they can absorb you
A bit like the old-style early Smallpox innoculation by giving you Cowpox so that you were immune to the more serious version of the pox...
But it doesn't really make sense in this case because why then didn't the triffids drag them off like they did everyone else they stung?
They didn't hang around waiting for all the other people they stung to decompose.
So all this sources are wrong and you are correct. Hmm.
Yes, I am right. The movie version has the Triffids already in place, on Earth when the meteors blind the population. They DO NOT arrive concurrently with the mass blinding as previously stated. Geddit? Can I be any clearer?
What’s more, in the book their origin is NEVER defnitively explained but it is implied it is as a result of Russian bio-engineering
Instead of linking to other people’s misinformation go watch the film and read the book and then come back and say sorry.
Well, clearly it was fundamental to this adaptation because of the explicit flashbacks (which just annoyed the hell out of me...) so it was obvious that it was central to the story. I just think they've ruined a good story as the book was really good.
I just hope the people who enjoyed this adaptation read the book now as they will be missing out.
I've read the book several times, though not recently. I compromised by only re-watching the 1981 series yesterday.
Given that background, probably the underlying theme of the original story was that the human race/human society had been thrown out of its equilibrium by mass blindness and triffids. The rest of the book showed attempts to create a new way of life that would work in the new environment, with only early Coker deviating from that, with work parties to bridge the gap before someone "sorts it out". The various communities were set up, but found wanting. Even Sussex wasn't going to work permanently, as they were working out, with the Triffids working things out. Torrence and his group were trying to find a way of living in the environment, and perhaps did. (The non-Wyndham sequel had him survive). Finally, on the Isle of Wight, they've found a way to live in the new environment, with the Triffids, so that they can start rebuilding again.
The mask was a symbol of how the inhabitants of the area the Triffids came from had already found a way to live with them, but that had been forgotten. (By the world, as well as Bill).
I was a bit annoyed by the Mask thing while it was happening. But now that the show is finished, I see how it works.
You can take the mask thing on at least two levels. In a simple way, just that this was a solution to getting them out of the house in an exciting way. But, subtle though it is, it's also a symbol of how they're going to learn to live in a Triffid dominated world. And I believe that the writers put that in there deliberately, I don't think I'm over-analysing it. But, it's subtle. It's not a seawater over-simple in your face solution. And, I believe that it's good writing worthy of the original.
I've just started watching the first episode of the 1981 series on You Tube, meaning just to watch the creepy credits, but I've got totally sucked in to watching the whole thing. It's so creepy and fab! I'd forgotten how good it is at setting the scene really quickly and simply and explaining all the key information about triffids and so on. And John Duttine is a really good actor - you learn far more about Bill's personality in the first two minutes than in the whole of the new version.
But it doesn't really make sense in this case because why then didn't the triffids drag them off like they did everyone else they stung?
They didn't hang around waiting for all the other people they stung to decompose.
They can only produce a certain amount of poison over time so there would be little point in using some if they're already stung.
Yes, I am right. The movie version has the Triffids already in place, on Earth when the meteors blind the population. They DO NOT arrive concurrently with the mass blinding as previously stated. Geddit? Can I be any clearer?
What’s more, in the book their origin is NEVER defnitively explained but it is implied it is as a result of Russian bio-engineering
Instead of linking to other people’s misinformation go watch the film and read the book and then come back and say sorry.
I have watched the film many times. Yes there was the old man who talked to Mason and said he'd seen Triffids in a greenhouse years before. This does indeed imply that they had at some point in the past been on Earth but not in large numbers.
I still firmly maintain that they arrived en masse during the blinding meteor shower.
But they could still drag them off and eat them though. That's what they did with anyone else who was stung.
True. Well, they are blind, so I guess it could be that if they detect a sting then that prey belongs to another triffid so they leave it. They wouldn't know if that person was already being dragged off.
Anyway I loved the book and the 1982 adaptation and this one. I can't believe how many people are ripping into it in this thread and the other thread in the non-cult area.
But they could still drag them off and eat them though. That's what they did with anyone else who was stung.
There was a comment before that the triffids always went for the eyes. Without the later context, I certainly assumed that was because that was that the triffids "knew" that was the easiest way to disable a human. But since the poison killed, there's no need to go for the eyes. So, after the poison reveal (and hinted at by the flashbacks) the eyes have a more vital role in the triffid (predator) - human (prey) relationship. Like the book, it seems we're not meant to know yet how that works, it's left incompletely explained. And, I think, better for it.
i don't disagree with the theory of why the mask was stuck in there but in the end it wasn't worth doing as it just ended up looking silly and crowbarred in.
But they could still drag them off and eat them though. That's what they did with anyone else who was stung.
Also - why the mask at all?
No-one actually wore the thing and they could have put triffid poison round their eyes without using the mask at all.
Perhaps the mask was designed to let the poison seep through at the correct speed, and limited to the eyes, for the method to work. Sort of like using masking tape and a paint gun when you're painting.
But, I think the main narrative function of the mask was to represent the more "primitive" solution to living with the triffids. While the high tech methods had failed with society.
i don't disagree with the theory of why the mask was stuck in there but in the end it wasn't worth doing as it just ended up looking silly and crowbarred in.
I can't see this. Without the subtext of post-apocalypse humans struggling to find a way to survive in the new world, neither the original book nor the new adaptation would have much meaning. This adaptation relies on the mask and what it represents. It's not crow-barred in, the new adaptation is to a sizeable degree, built around it. Otherwise you have a simple action show with people running from plants and evil people with guns.
No, not in the slightest. There was no magic solution. They just had to move to the IoW and keep the triffids out, and Bill thought that one day they would think of a way of killing them properly and then they would go back to reclaim the rest of the country.
Maybe I'm over thinking this, but surely they wouldn't have to stay on the Isle of Wight very long- the Triffids would exhaust their food supply very rapidly and then the population would collaspe. Unless we're to assume they can take up farming.
I assumed that the poison made them think that the people were Triffids and so left them alone?
They didn't hang around waiting for all the other people they stung to decompose
Yyes they did - remember the brief shot of Bill and Jo standing on the motorway bridge watching all the triffids standing beside stopped cars waiting for the bodies inside they'd stung as the car doors opened to decompose?;)
Or all the Mother Superior's "pet" triffids standing in the woods waiting for her sacrifices to decompose?
I can't see this. Without the subtext of post-apocalypse humans struggling to find a way to survive in the new world, neither the original book nor the new adaptation would have much meaning.
don't try and compare the book to this adapation. the book spent large periods of time focusing on humanity trying to cope and what possible scientific solutions could be used.
The adaption basically skimmed over the whole aspect of the main characters dealing with their changed circumstances.
This adaptation relies on the mask and what it represents. It's not crow-barred in, the new adaptation is to a sizeable degree, built around it. Otherwise you have a simple action show with people running from plants and evil people with guns.
I agree with your latter point, as this really was what the programme centred on. chucking in the mask with 5 minutes to go doesn't suddenly mean we have a great insight into how everyone is going to cope in this new world order. for a start what the new world order is is never really gone into in any detail at all.
I think you don't like it because you don't properly understand it. The proverbial whoosh sound
I'm afraid, sonny, that I've been reading Scifi for at least 45 years now. Apart from the shelves of military history, there are over 5,000 scifi and fantasy books crammed into my little abode.
You're "thinking" within the context of the programme - which was crap. If your context is crap, anything or any judgement based ON it is....well, crap-based LOL
It's a bit like Watergate and "noone said there SHOULDN'T be a coverup"....I.E. living within a contextual environment
If you start from a position of assuming this show was good - then you've putting yourself in the position of what closes the story is "good" too.
But in this case NEITHER end of the process was good. The problem with something like this is - it CAN'T be a "standalone" experience, because of the book origin at the very least.
The adaption basically skimmed over the whole aspect of the main characters dealing with their changed circumstances.
....
Yeah I'd have liked to have seen more soul searching going on as per the book and the 1982 adaptation. There were not any discussions about saving the blind, but is that a waste of resources, should you let them die to save the sighted and so on.
I agree with your latter point, as this really was what the programme centred on. chucking in the mask with 5 minutes to go doesn't suddenly mean we have a great insight into how everyone is going to cope in this new world order. for a start what the new world order is is never really gone into in any detail at all.
No, we don't have any great insight into how it's going to work. While the book described their new life much more completely. So, the result we have here is different from the book in this respect. I don't think that the book is better in this respect, they are similarly themed, but different in detail conclusions.
And the mask wasn't chucked in with five minutes to go. It's been a constant theme through out the two episodes. First as the flashbacks, then appearing in material form, then finally (in the last five minutes) gaining meaning.
Yeah I'd have liked to have seen more soul searching going on as per the book and the 1982 adaptation. There were not any discussions about saving the blind, but is that a waste of resources, should you let them die to save the sighted and so on.
This adaptation traded off less soul searching for more action, definitely.
Comments
I actually also remember the 60's film intro narration.
"This is a newcomer, Triffidus Selectus, brought to Earth on a meteor shower during, the day of the Triffids!!!"
I agree. A blindingly good novel. An sf author, might have been JG Ballard, not sure, said it was a disaster movie in an English country garden where they go on holiday to the Isle of Wight afterwards. Probably sour grapes (or triffids).
Still, definately worth a read.
They didn't hang around waiting for all the other people they stung to decompose.
Yes, I am right. The movie version has the Triffids already in place, on Earth when the meteors blind the population. They DO NOT arrive concurrently with the mass blinding as previously stated. Geddit? Can I be any clearer?
What’s more, in the book their origin is NEVER defnitively explained but it is implied it is as a result of Russian bio-engineering
Instead of linking to other people’s misinformation go watch the film and read the book and then come back and say sorry.
I've read the book several times, though not recently. I compromised by only re-watching the 1981 series yesterday.
Given that background, probably the underlying theme of the original story was that the human race/human society had been thrown out of its equilibrium by mass blindness and triffids. The rest of the book showed attempts to create a new way of life that would work in the new environment, with only early Coker deviating from that, with work parties to bridge the gap before someone "sorts it out". The various communities were set up, but found wanting. Even Sussex wasn't going to work permanently, as they were working out, with the Triffids working things out. Torrence and his group were trying to find a way of living in the environment, and perhaps did. (The non-Wyndham sequel had him survive). Finally, on the Isle of Wight, they've found a way to live in the new environment, with the Triffids, so that they can start rebuilding again.
The mask was a symbol of how the inhabitants of the area the Triffids came from had already found a way to live with them, but that had been forgotten. (By the world, as well as Bill).
I was a bit annoyed by the Mask thing while it was happening. But now that the show is finished, I see how it works.
You can take the mask thing on at least two levels. In a simple way, just that this was a solution to getting them out of the house in an exciting way. But, subtle though it is, it's also a symbol of how they're going to learn to live in a Triffid dominated world. And I believe that the writers put that in there deliberately, I don't think I'm over-analysing it. But, it's subtle. It's not a seawater over-simple in your face solution. And, I believe that it's good writing worthy of the original.
They can only produce a certain amount of poison over time so there would be little point in using some if they're already stung.
I think you don't like it because you don't properly understand it. The proverbial whoosh sound.
I have watched the film many times. Yes there was the old man who talked to Mason and said he'd seen Triffids in a greenhouse years before. This does indeed imply that they had at some point in the past been on Earth but not in large numbers.
I still firmly maintain that they arrived en masse during the blinding meteor shower.
Also - why the mask at all?
No-one actually wore the thing and they could have put triffid poison round their eyes without using the mask at all.
True. Well, they are blind, so I guess it could be that if they detect a sting then that prey belongs to another triffid so they leave it. They wouldn't know if that person was already being dragged off.
Anyway I loved the book and the 1982 adaptation and this one. I can't believe how many people are ripping into it in this thread and the other thread in the non-cult area.
There was a comment before that the triffids always went for the eyes. Without the later context, I certainly assumed that was because that was that the triffids "knew" that was the easiest way to disable a human. But since the poison killed, there's no need to go for the eyes. So, after the poison reveal (and hinted at by the flashbacks) the eyes have a more vital role in the triffid (predator) - human (prey) relationship. Like the book, it seems we're not meant to know yet how that works, it's left incompletely explained. And, I think, better for it.
Perhaps the mask was designed to let the poison seep through at the correct speed, and limited to the eyes, for the method to work. Sort of like using masking tape and a paint gun when you're painting.
But, I think the main narrative function of the mask was to represent the more "primitive" solution to living with the triffids. While the high tech methods had failed with society.
I can't see this. Without the subtext of post-apocalypse humans struggling to find a way to survive in the new world, neither the original book nor the new adaptation would have much meaning. This adaptation relies on the mask and what it represents. It's not crow-barred in, the new adaptation is to a sizeable degree, built around it. Otherwise you have a simple action show with people running from plants and evil people with guns.
Maybe I'm over thinking this, but surely they wouldn't have to stay on the Isle of Wight very long- the Triffids would exhaust their food supply very rapidly and then the population would collaspe. Unless we're to assume they can take up farming.
I assumed that the poison made them think that the people were Triffids and so left them alone?
Yyes they did - remember the brief shot of Bill and Jo standing on the motorway bridge watching all the triffids standing beside stopped cars waiting for the bodies inside they'd stung as the car doors opened to decompose?;)
Or all the Mother Superior's "pet" triffids standing in the woods waiting for her sacrifices to decompose?
don't try and compare the book to this adapation. the book spent large periods of time focusing on humanity trying to cope and what possible scientific solutions could be used.
The adaption basically skimmed over the whole aspect of the main characters dealing with their changed circumstances.
I agree with your latter point, as this really was what the programme centred on. chucking in the mask with 5 minutes to go doesn't suddenly mean we have a great insight into how everyone is going to cope in this new world order. for a start what the new world order is is never really gone into in any detail at all.
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/tv_and_radio/article6966578.ece
I'm afraid, sonny, that I've been reading Scifi for at least 45 years now. Apart from the shelves of military history, there are over 5,000 scifi and fantasy books crammed into my little abode.
You're "thinking" within the context of the programme - which was crap. If your context is crap, anything or any judgement based ON it is....well, crap-based LOL
It's a bit like Watergate and "noone said there SHOULDN'T be a coverup"....I.E. living within a contextual environment
If you start from a position of assuming this show was good - then you've putting yourself in the position of what closes the story is "good" too.
But in this case NEITHER end of the process was good. The problem with something like this is - it CAN'T be a "standalone" experience, because of the book origin at the very least.
Hmmm I see they've neatly avoided "damning it with faint praise"
No, we don't have any great insight into how it's going to work. While the book described their new life much more completely. So, the result we have here is different from the book in this respect. I don't think that the book is better in this respect, they are similarly themed, but different in detail conclusions.
And the mask wasn't chucked in with five minutes to go. It's been a constant theme through out the two episodes. First as the flashbacks, then appearing in material form, then finally (in the last five minutes) gaining meaning.
This adaptation traded off less soul searching for more action, definitely.