So you've read the book. Then the film comes out. NO NO NO NO NO!!! That's all wrong, what a bunch of cock. In your head the story goes like this and then some up his own arse director shows it a different way and everyone who doesn't read books has got it ALL WRONG!!! You simply don't understand!
Blade Runner for me (book was 'do androids dream of electric sheep?') followed by 'I am legend'.
Off you go then....
Black Hawk Down.
Got to disagree with you about Bladerunner. The film was vastly superior to the book which, unlike the film, I found to be lacking in any interesting characters, excitement or any exploration of what it meant to be human. In the book the Roy Batty character was completely ineffectual and was disposed of quite easily by Deckard unlike the strong anti-hero played by Rutger Huer in the film.
Amercan Psycho, let's be honest, they could never film the book could they?? Rat and Brie anyone?!!!
Agree with uponthedowns, Philip K Dick could do ideas but he couldn't actually write. Probably something to do with breaking his brain with drugs, I reckon.
The Golden Compass, bleurgh...
I loved the Lord of the Rings films, but I did get cross with what they did with some of the characters.
Eowyn - They completely changed her character - she went from being a cold warrior to being a complete and utter wet blanket.
Faramir - the whole bloody point of the character was that he was the opposite of Boromir! Good natured, selfless, strong willed, yet seen as the lesser brother by their father.
Denethor - went from being a slightly more sympathetic character in the books to being just plain batshit crazy and a bit more plain villain in the film.
Not too bothered though, they did an amazing job with a book that's bloody hard to make a film out of!
[i]Cold Mountain[/i] - I refused to watch it.
Philip K Dick could do ideas but he couldn't actually write
Steady on there, PKD was a genius, bladerunner was only inspired by the book, not intended to be a faithful adaption.
Going back a bit, silence of the Lambs
film was good ,but not as good as the book!!
not read much commercial stuff lately
but if someone turns the book
'the gold fields journal of William diaper,alias cannibal jack 1851-1853
should make a ripping film!!
I thought that I am legend was a shite film... Why even call it by the same name as the book, if you are going to completely change the story and the 'meaning' of the book. FFS.
Fatherland by Robert Harris was a fantastic boook.The film was an opportunity wasted.
I was infuriated by the gross distortion of The Borrowers in the cinematic adaptation - I felt the characterisation was sketchy at best, the sets were nothing like I'd imagined them to be and a lot of the deeper messages of the book were simply glossed over. Some of this, I think, is inevitable, but I do feel that literary classics deserve rather more respect. Eventually I walked out of the cinema to register my disapproval and I have no doubt that a lot of other very angry, petty-minded idiots like myself will have done the same.
I feel your pain about The Borrowers, BWD. The portrayal of the anarchic proto-Green ethos of the subject group was very poorly done, and it glossed over their essentially Marxist re-distributive philosophy.
It was more the costumes to be honest.
Oh.
Never read the book twohats but watched a documentary where they interviewed the soldiers that were their and thought the film was keeping in with what happened.
Agree with Mrs Toast on LOTR - loved the films but there were a few things that massively irritated me. That whole bit that was invented with Faramir was pointless.
Also bloody Orlando Bloom sliding down stairs using his shield like a skateboard at the siege of Helm's Deep! 🙄
I quite enjoyed I Am Legend but it was nowhere near as good as the book.
Agree with you on I Am Legend, they really balls'd that up.
Starship Troopers!
One of the greatest known discourses on modern politics, destroyed...
Starship Troopers is ace if you just forget that it's supposed to have anything to do with the book.
fear and loathing, why did i watch that? god awful film
Any film of any Tom Clancy book...
FWIW, I won't watch Green Mile as the book was so good, I don't want it ruined Hollywood style.
loddrik - MemberAmercan Psycho, let's be honest, they could never film the book could they?? Rat and Brie anyone?!!!
spot on
not on the same level by any means and i dont intend it to be but
being a danny wallace fan - id read yes man a while back. The film came out while i was in nz and i missed it due to cost of cinema and better things to do with my time there.
rented it out recently and thought - "my that was shit wasnt it "
where as the book was funny as **** the film was just slapstick comedy at best but mostly poor humour.
on the other hand i thought that the flying scotsman was an excellent adaptation of a book to the screens for masses - they missed out important facts yesand changed some - but for 80% of the audiance were they important ? if anything its inspired non riding mates to read the book. Always an issue with speciality films like that where they pidgeonhole their audiance and dont think about the others. I took my at the time non riding missus to see it. She was convinced she would hate it as it was a cycling film - that it was not.
Any film of any Tom Clancy book...
Yeah it must be pretty hard to adapt all those several page sections where he ****s on about minute details of weapons and military technology. 😉
Never read the book twohats but watched a documentary where they interviewed the soldiers that were their and thought the film was keeping in with what happened.
+1
On the special edition DVD, there's a commentary by 4 of the soldiers that were actually there and they gave it a big thumbs up. The only area where they said there was some differences was the weapons used by the Somalis. The film showed them using more advanced weapons than they had in reality but on the whole they said it was a good depiction of what happened.
Yeah it must be pretty hard to adapt all those several page sections where he ****s on about minute details of weapons and military technology.
😀 Agreed. Interesting that perhaps the "best" film was the thinnest book - Hunt for Red October.
Interesting that you pick on Clancy for ****ing on about nowt for sveral pages when you're obviously a fan of Tolkein... 😛
Jurassic park was one that struck me, the film was good but not in the same league as the book.
Interesting that you pick on Clancy for ****ing on about nowt for sveral pages when you're obviously a fan of Tolkein...
Yeah my favourite field of ****ing on about stuff is dwarves and magic swords, which makes me way more cool.
I find this tends to happen with all films a bit.
Just seen a few clips and the trailer for the film of Cormac McCarthy's The Road which is released sometime soon. I can already tell I'll be tremendously irked by the characterisation and the visuals. It always happens because no matter how good the film is as a stand-alone thing, it's never what's in my head. That always disappoints me and somehow affects my fondness for both the book and the film for a while. Then I tend to get over it and my brain starts to accommodate both.
Oh God... don't get me started.
Captain Corelli's Mandolin is probably the worst offender. If only for the woeful miscasting of Nic Cage and his terrible cod-Italian accent. Film itself was really bland and schmaltzy.
On the factual side, Perfect Storm didn't even get close to doing the book justice.
On the positive side, I think the recent Channel 4 adaptations of Red Riding were really well done - didn't stick exactly to the storyline but really captured the dark feel and sense of menace from the books.
I also think the film of The Constant Gardener was pretty well done.
theyve made [i]the road[/i] into a film? thats the best book ive read all year, damn thats too soon for some studio to screw it up for me 🙁
i think in general book adaptations are getting better but comic adaptations? such tosh which is a shame because if anything film is becoming a medium better adapted to bringin comic books to the screen. not that any book or comic should be allowed to be a film until everyone has been made to read them.
The Beach
I was surprised too fontmoss, but [url=
it is[/url]
that trailer gives away more about events preceding their journey than the book does! looks like there are going to be far too many people in the film, bah humbug
The one that makes me really angry is I am Legend: The whole book was made by the twist at the end and to change that was inexcusable. The film, up to the end, wasn't that bad, but to change the very thing that gave the story it's meaning left me literally fuming.
I have to disagree about what I have seen about the Road: The clips that I have seen actually reflect perfectly what was in my head when reading the book (but I guess that is the beauty of reading). The thing that does worry me is if they do the same thing that they did to I am Legend and change the ending and make the film more palatable.
looks like there are going to be far too many people in the film
I didn't get that impression at all: In fact it seemed a good representation of the events in the book. I wonder if it seems that there are more people because they are all packed into a 2:30 trailer, rather that a 2 hour film. Apparently they do flesh out his wife's character, but not to the detriment of the story.
it looks good dont get me wrong but in that short clip we see his wife loads, we find out what has happened to the world and we see at least 2 of the major human interactions on their journey -ok its a trailer but the suddeness and unexpectedness of him meeting anyone is lost, im just worried the loneliness and quietness of the book may get lost in an attempt to bring in crowds.
ok its a trailer but the suddeness and unexpectedness of him meeting anyone is lost, im just worried the loneliness and quietness of the book may get lost in an attempt to bring in crowds.
Me too, but surely what you describe there is, as I said, down to events of a two hour film being crammed into a two minute trailer?
This seems to give me hope:
[url= http://www.screendaily.com/5005228.article ]Review[/url]
Jaws is totally different from book to film, one of my favourite films as a kid.. read the book and couldn't believe the differences, it was made more palatable as a movie, the book is a lot darker
Looking forward to seeing The Road, but I'm one of the few people who enjoyed the adaptation of No Country for Old Men, including the ending.
All The Pretty Horses was a bit pish as a film though.
I'm very ambivalent about Blood Meridian - part of me hopes they never try to adapt it for the screen, but another part of me thinks it would me a truly amazing film if it was done well (ie. the way it plays in my head), though I don't think it is possible to do that and get a certificate for it. It's so superbly written that it's pretty cinematic straight off the page.
Oh, and Catch 22 - great book, awful film.
WHAAAAAT 👿
Ridley Scott turned Dick's novel into the most influential SF film ever made.
Although different storylines they are both a complex rumination on the effects of dehumanisation. What film has produced the range of human emotions so vividly that BR has?
Its story is fantastically layered beyond belief. Religious parallels are rampant. The moody motion score by Vangelis is superb. The amazing cinemaphotography and fantastic set and costume design are breathtaking and the script - Absolutely Sublime. Let me remind you Roy Batty’s beautiful soliloquy and cinema’s most touching piece of dialogue;
[i]“I’ve seen things you people wouldn’t believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched c-beams glitter in the dark near the Tanhauser Gate. All those ... moments will be lost ... in time. Like ... tears ... in rain. Time ... to die”.[/i]
That still makes the hairs on the back of my neck stand up and my nose fizz.
With all due respect but what with some of the utter balls written on this forum the OP could be the biggest tosh ever! Sorry, I appreciate it's a matter of opinion and all that.
All the best.
Lots of people mentioned I Am Legend, one of the 2 endings is a little more in keeping with the original book. And TBH I think quite a lot of the film actually works better than the book, which now feels very dated and unsubtle. Frinstance, the film shows the infected working together, setting traps and communicating, but all through that Smith's character ignores it and still treats them like brainless animals- quite subtle since it's not explicitly stated. Same with the twist at the end, rather than rubbing the reader's nose in it like Matheson did, the film shows you the realisation without forcing it on you as much.
But, the main concept's there, intact... Won't say more than that because of spoilers though.
easy tiger!
dont forget that speech was improvised if memory serves and no ones having a go at mr scott - he made daleks for petes sake!
EDIT: still to read that review but youre prob right about cramming all the action into 2min trailer, i really hope so anyway. i loved that book
fontmoss,
What difference does it make that the speech was improvised (you are right, it was)? In fact that spontaneity by Hauer adds to the films greatness! This staggering scene and one that is more associated with BR than any other was not in the book.
I also understand that the critique wasn't aimed at Scott. Again what point are you making? I’m simply disagreeing (vehemently) with samurai for the reasons stated. The film wasn’t “wrong” it was inspired and adapted from the book. It wasn’t a literal translation and never pretended to be. The film was Scott and Co's vision and in that sense comparing the two lacks relevance.
All the best.
i wasn't making any point
all the best
