10 Biggest Differences Between Lockwood & Co. The Netflix Show and The Books
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 фев 2023
- The show Lockwood & Co is based on the first two books in the series by Jonathan Stroud - The Screaming Staircase, and The Whispering Skull. Despite trying so hard to stay true to the books, the series, Lockwood and Co added and dropped 10 significant things, so let's find out which ones!
Subscribe: bit.ly/3fU2JpC
#bopping 
Развлечения
Hey, I noticed you didn't credit the artists; the George Cubbins illustration was made by DoodlingRaka, the NightZine artwork and the Lockwood and Lucy illustration were made by graf-fiction, the Joplin illustration was made by albanaxy, the Lockwood, Lucy and George illustration was made by icandrawthingz!
A few differences you missed:
Fairfax came to Lockwood and Co in the books, while they went to him in the series. I was peeved when they made this change, because it made more sense for him to go to them and make the offer.
In the catacombs, George and Joplin had wrestled together, and the lenses of George's glasses were knocked out. When Lucy entered, she left her rucksack when she entered the chamber they were in. George looked into the mirror, but he couldn't see without his glasses, so he pretended to die. When Joplin tried to force Lucy to look in, George tackled Joplin. When Lucy made the skull look in the boneglass in the series, I immediately went: Oh, that makes sense.
I don’t think so that it makes so much sense that Fairfax went to them. He is probably one of the richest persons in that world. It would be so suspicious if he would have went to them and asked them to hurry for no reason. But with the changes it makes more sense. It makes sense that Lockwood and co were so desperate that they had to look everywhere. And they had to hurry because Fairfax wanted to sell his house as soon as possible.
In the books it makes sense, too. But only if we believe that Fairfax is stupid. And that Lockwood is much more stupid than normally.
And for the skull…, yeah. In a way it makes more sense to use the skull. But I am afraid that they lost the skull. They walked without the skull back home. So how will they replace him for rest of the story? In the books the skull was a funny boy. I am wondering how the Show will end without him being who he is in the books.
@@ben-asinus I sincerely hope they don't remove the skulls humor. He is basically the comedic relief many times. If they don't let the skull be funny, that might just change certain fans into haters. Maybe.
@@a_person._.7214 they already deleted the humor of George. I am a big fan that they didn’t make all the fatshaming jokes but George had a lot of great lines in the books and I missed them. The actor is great but his lines could be better.
So yeah, I’m not that optimistic about the skull.
I have not read the books and liked the serie, but I have read The Witcher and seeing what we got with that turd of an adaption...I was wondering how much did they change? Did they atleast keep the overarching theme intact? what about characters overal?
@@leevio in general Lockwood and co is a great adaptation. They respect all the characters and that’s something they haven’t done in “the Witcher”. Changes are ok for me as long as they respect the story and the idea of the character. And they do it in Lockwood and co. To be honest I think that the TV Show is telling a better story than the books.
One big diffenerence I like to point out that wasnt mentioned was that in the second book, when Lucy told Lockwood and George about how the skull spoke to her. George never called her crazy but was instead extremely curious what the skull said to her. As George was known for "experimenting" with the skull.
But it was mentioned in the show...
Haha they did mention that he experimented with it in the show, but nothing like the book, which implied some weird things like taking baths with it, etc.
@@AnHourOfWolves True
Another major difference ist the pining, which only started by book 3 and gets more intense in books 4&5. Now Lucy and Lockwood as well as Flo and George have clear romantic undertones.
Also, Lockwood's mental issues and emotional block only really become apparent to Lucy in book 3 and 4, while in the show she is already calling him out for it. The seem to develop charakters and their relationships much faster. Also Kipps just offered Lucy a job but did not ask her out in the books. There are, however, other charakters with romantic interest in Lucy. Hope to see more of them in the show.
Sometimes it's the differences that make the story better. In the books, it fits into the the whole story. In an adaptation of the novels, you have to change this, and that to make it fit, scientific reasons. Or characters motivation. But you only have to enjoy it movie or the novel. Please take it as it is. 🙏
Usually film adaptations don’t come close to the books, but in this case they did a great job. In the books it seemed that all characters except Lockwood were physically wanting and somewhat repellent. I’ve only read books 1 and 2, so maybe that will change later on, but so far it is off putting.
The biggest difference is that the show was canceled
:(
There are petitions with over 25.000 people signed it, hope it helps :(
The only change that bothered me was that they took away George’s role in saving the day during the boneglass scene. He saved Lucy because HE COULDN’T SEE into the boneglass because his glasses broke.
That was the first (and only) scene I’ve encountered in a book where being visually impaired was in fact a great thing and not some limitation that needed fixing.
In the series it was all a George self-esteem monologue thing that distracted Joplin long enough. I don’t even remember the series that well anymore. I did enjoy it but taking that scene away from George and also erasing his humor… eh, I don’t know. Books are an always better.
Isnt the biggest difference when they decided to let lucy have friends before Lockwood and co? 😂 book lucy isn't exactly a people person
Yeah thats a huge difference. I love the Norri character. They did a LOT with her considering how little screen time that part got.
They never say she didn't have friends in the books, it's more like, she mentions them and that they're dead because it's too painful to talk about them. But she's not a people person indeed
@@allieeverest they did, I was quite impressed with how much detail they managed to put into everything given that it was 2 books in 1, I think if they go on to do 1 book per series then the rest of the show is going to be amazing
Yes! Especially since book Lucy says that she does not have female friends and now she got Norrie, who inspires her and will probably motivate her to find a cure for ghost lock.
@@isabella-ce1hs that's a good point, now they've changed ghost lock so it's not certain death without immediate adrenaline (didn't make sense in the book why agents wouldn't carry it at all times) it could well be fixable, and if science can't fix it then lucy is the only person with otherworld connections who could figure it out, well other than spoilers but I don't think they'd be up for helping given the interference. On that note it would be nice if the show actually showed the consequences of fixing that instead of leaving the series on lockwood and co letting DEPRAC sort that out and not revealing if removing the fence fixed the problem or just lessened it
Sad that it din get 2nd Season...
That was a great show and I liked the alternate bits, all of them.
Some of the changes were really good. Like making Joplin a woman, who ist motherly at first but eventually flirtatious. Genious move!
I dont mind the changes as the overall story remains the same and the bits that are majorly different or left out where clearly either not possible or checked by the original author
It’s psychical research. Not physical.
Lucy destabilized the large smoke monster with her rapier, not a dagger.
I don’t understand how such simple details could be gotten so wrong. What else is wrong here?!
I think they drank A LOT more alcohol in the show, didn’t they? Or did I get that wrong?
(Comenting this late because it took me a year to read all the books)
I'm a person who thinks that books are better than TV adaptations, but in some scenes I think its better the TV adaptation. My favourite example is the backstory of Lucy.
While in the books her backstory is mentioned and talked, I think that the TV adaptation made a great work by putting more backstory to Lucy (like the scenes where her friends died, family problems and job issues). Those kind of scenes while they were mentioned in the book, in the TV adaptation were more dramatic and I think those kind of events are important to understand why Lucy is the way she is when she arrives at Lockwood & Co.
In the books permanent ghost lock isn't a thing
The show is pretty good but it can't compete with the books.
Can anyone confirm wether or not in the first book the monks were Satanic ?
I think the show made a good job making the whole thing inclusive and giving it a more feminist undertone than the books. I like both:)
First!
It feels like this video was made by someone who hasn’t read the books bc a fair amount of this was wrong
The actor that plays George is still Caucasian. So it doesn't matter. I found George annoying at first.