Movie treatments of books (Merged: Bastardizing Books)

A slow, analog alternative to the internet

Moderators: SecondTalon, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
no-genius
Seemed like a good idea at the time
Posts: 4221
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 6:32 pm UTC
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Movie treatments of books (Merged: Bastardizing Books)

Postby no-genius » Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:10 am UTC

The radio 4 series-s are good though. They're 2/5 the way through Night Watch.
I don't sing, I just shout. All. On. One. Note.
Official ironmen you are free, champions officially

The Mighty Thesaurus wrote:Why? It does nothing to address dance music's core problem: the fact that it sucks.

pig nash
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 5:34 am UTC

Re: Movie treatments of books (Merged: Bastardizing Books)

Postby pig nash » Sat Mar 08, 2008 7:58 am UTC

I think that Apocalypse Now! is the best book to movie adaptation, although it is really just based off of Heart of Darkness, and not really a direct realization of the book.

User avatar
Felstaff
Occam's Taser
Posts: 5178
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 7:10 pm UTC
Location: ¢ ₪ ¿ ¶ § ∴ ® © ™ ؟ ¡ ‽ æ Þ ° ₰ ₤ ಡಢ

Re: Movie treatments of books (Merged: Bastardizing Books)

Postby Felstaff » Tue Apr 01, 2008 10:49 am UTC

pig nash wrote:I think that Apocalypse Now! is the best book to movie adaptation, although it is really just based off of Heart of Darkness, and not really a direct realization of the book.

Yeah, I was reading Heart of Darkness, and spent the first fifty pages thinking, 'this is all well and good, but where are the helicopters?'



'...And since when was the Congo river in Vietnam?'
Away, you scullion! you rampallion! You fustilarian! I'll tickle your catastrophe.

User avatar
Ati
Posts: 643
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2008 6:34 pm UTC
Location: I'll give you a hint: it's dry, and slightly radioactive.
Contact:

Re: Movie treatments of books (Merged: Bastardizing Books)

Postby Ati » Sun Apr 06, 2008 7:42 pm UTC

The worst I've ever seen was the wrinkle in time miniseries.

It was like watching my favorite book being repeatedly raped by an amorous, leprosy infected pig. Don't watch it.
I can kill you with my brain.

Image

User avatar
Eazy1980
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 12:54 am UTC
Location: Sydney, NSW, Australia
Contact:

Re: Movie treatments of books (Merged: Bastardizing Books)

Postby Eazy1980 » Wed Apr 09, 2008 4:15 am UTC

I found that the best adaptation book -> movie was The Hunt for Red October. Excellent book and a great movie (if you discount a Russian submarine captain with a Scottish accent).

The HHGTTG movie was ok. Simply ok. The BBC tv series has been watched so many times in my house that the DVD's are starting to delaminate! Almost word perfect from the books, and the tragic, low budget cartoons from the Guide are fantastic!

I've got to throw in my two cents against the LOTR movies. Despite the fact that for the most part they were an excellent representation of the world Tolkien gave us to play with, several things annoyed me. Cate Blanchett drove me to the verge of homicide (i never really liked her anyway) with her limp wristed, flouncy portrayel of Galadriel. One of the most powerful beings to ever walk Middle Earth and she comes across as some consumptive socialite from the 1800's!!
The army of the dead bugged the crap out of me too! They are supposed to be the most feared army in existence, striking terror into their foes simply by showing up, and they looked like nothing more than hyper aggressive snot bubbles on a rampage! AARRGGH!
A minor quibble was with the reforging of Narsil into Anduriel (sp on those?). This was supposed to occur before the Fellowship left Rivendell and had Aragorn carrying it for the whole journey. It also helps to drive off the Nazgul as they know that they would be hard pressed to not get killed by it (with the exception of the Witch King, obviously).
That said, i was extremely pleased with the rest of the movies! The balrog looked fantastic, the actors (bar one, although Hugo Weaving kinda bugged me as Elrond) did justice to their characters, and the movies managed to get across the massive scope of the books nicely.

</rant> :P
"The orphanage attacked me! It was self defence!"
-Richard, Chief Warlock of the Brothers of Darkness, Lord of the Thirteen Hells, Master of the Black, Lord of the Undead, and the mayor of a little vilage up the coast.

User avatar
TheAmazingRando
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 9:58 am UTC
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: Movie treatments of books (Merged: Bastardizing Books)

Postby TheAmazingRando » Wed Apr 09, 2008 5:27 am UTC

Ati wrote:The worst I've ever seen was the wrinkle in time miniseries.

It was like watching my favorite book being repeatedly raped by an amorous, leprosy infected pig. Don't watch it.

God that was terrible. I had all but blocked it from my mind.

User avatar
JayDee
Posts: 3620
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 3:13 am UTC
Location: Most livable city in the world.
Contact:

Re: Movie treatments of books (Merged: Bastardizing Books)

Postby JayDee » Sun Jun 01, 2008 7:53 am UTC

So, I just finished reading Jurassic Park.

Another book for my 'the movie version is pretty much as good as the book' list. Not surprising, since if I understand correctly Spielberg convinced Crichton to write the book so he could make a movie.

The Dinosaurs appear more often in the novel, and there are a few extra scenes, a slightly different ending. Hammond was a less sympathetic character. I would have thought the movie would be better for giving the Dinosaurs a sense of menace, but the book did really well, especially with the Tyrannosaur and towards the end. On the other hand, the movie had more than enough Chaos theory ramblings, I could have done without more of that.

Next I need to hunt down a copy of the Neverending Story...

Oh, I also read The Bourne Supremacy a little while back, but it's not really worth comparing it to the movie. Not the same thing at all, very little in common.
The Mighty Thesaurus wrote:I believe that everything can and must be joked about.
Hawknc wrote:I like to think that he hasn't left, he's just finally completed his foe list.

User avatar
Sir_Elderberry
Posts: 4206
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:50 pm UTC
Location: Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Contact:

Re: Movie treatments of books (Merged: Bastardizing Books)

Postby Sir_Elderberry » Sun Jun 01, 2008 9:26 pm UTC

Eazy1980 wrote:The army of the dead bugged the crap out of me too! They are supposed to be the most feared army in existence, striking terror into their foes simply by showing up, and they looked like nothing more than hyper aggressive snot bubbles on a rampage! AARRGGH!


No, the bad part of that was how they changed from "get Aragorn some ships so he can come in with reinforcements" to "deus ex machina instawin Pelennor Fields, lol".
http://www.geekyhumanist.blogspot.com -- Science and the Concerned Voter
Belial wrote:You are the coolest guy that ever cooled.

I reiterate. Coolest. Guy.

Well. You heard him.

Joeldi
Posts: 1055
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 1:49 am UTC
Location: Central Queensland, Australia
Contact:

Re: Movie treatments of books (Merged: Bastardizing Books)

Postby Joeldi » Mon Jun 02, 2008 10:08 am UTC

Sir_Elderberry wrote:
Eazy1980 wrote:The army of the dead bugged the crap out of me too! They are supposed to be the most feared army in existence, striking terror into their foes simply by showing up, and they looked like nothing more than hyper aggressive snot bubbles on a rampage! AARRGGH!


No, the bad part of that was how they changed from "get Aragorn some ships so he can come in with reinforcements" to "deus ex machina instawin Pelennor Fields, lol".


I wouldn't call that Deus Ex Machina. They didn't come from out of nowhere, they showed Aragorn plan to go find them, find them, convince them to help, and then bring them back. Just regular old Deus.
I'm not saying it was a dumb thing to say that - obviously it wasn't anything like what happened in the book which I haven't read since I was 10.

no-genius wrote:I has the TV series on DVD. I like it, and the extras are OK. I haven't watched in ages, though.

Has anyone read Starship Titanic?


I read it. I didn't like it. It was like the plot of a DNA book, but without the constant banter and asides
and DNA's books don't really stand up without that.
I already have a hate thread. Necromancy > redundancy here, so post there.

roc314 wrote:America is a police state that communicates in txt speak...

"i hav teh dissentors brb""¡This cheese is burning me! u pwnd them bff""thx ur cool 2"

User avatar
Sir_Elderberry
Posts: 4206
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:50 pm UTC
Location: Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Contact:

Re: Movie treatments of books (Merged: Bastardizing Books)

Postby Sir_Elderberry » Mon Jun 02, 2008 10:15 pm UTC

That's true, it doesn't actually meet the definition of Deus Ex Machina. My mistake. But hopefully you can see what I'm saying, that they movie heroes had a Big Ass Secret Weapon that wasn't in the book.
http://www.geekyhumanist.blogspot.com -- Science and the Concerned Voter
Belial wrote:You are the coolest guy that ever cooled.

I reiterate. Coolest. Guy.

Well. You heard him.

SherryCQ
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 12:10 am UTC

Re: Movie treatments of books

Postby SherryCQ » Tue Jun 03, 2008 3:51 am UTC

blob wrote:Edit: Hayao Miyazaki could probably pull off a decent film adaptation.


Howl's Moving Castle. It deviates pretty far from the book in some aspects, but Diana Wynne Jones herself mentioned that it was a good movie adaption in its own right. It's one of my personal favorites--I get this warm fuzzy feeling after watching it, and the book gives me a very similar feeling. I think Miyazaki captured the spirit of HMC very well.

The Lion, Witch, and the Wardrobe was also good, as well as faithful to the book. The acting is also very earnest, considering it's most of the main cast's first movie.

On the negative side:

What the hell did they do to Prince Caspian? I haven't even watched it yet, but Susan is Caspian's LOVE INTEREST?! And they completely ignored what Caspian's SUPPOSED to look like! Those two details give me a strong foreboding feeling, but people say it's good as a standalone movie and if I have nothing else to do over the summer I'll watch it and shut off the part of my brain that is a Narnia fan.

Also, A Series of Unfortunate Events disappointed me incredibly. JIM CARREY AS COUNT OLAF IS NO. NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO. ORPHAN-CHASING FORTUNE-STEALER =/= JIM CARREY. AND THEY SQUISHED THREE OF THE BOOKS TOGETHER INTO ONE MOVIE--HOW DARE THEY?!

Even Jude Law as Lemony Snicket and the three main actors can't save the movie from that.

But overall, ELLA ENCHANTED IS THE WORST MOVIE ADAPTION I HAVE EVER SEEN. Harry Potter may be digging its own grave with all the stuff they cut out, but at least it's got excellent acting and cinematography to fall back on. AND it's not some camp monstrosity that only shares the title and general plot point.

User avatar
JayDee
Posts: 3620
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 3:13 am UTC
Location: Most livable city in the world.
Contact:

Re: Movie treatments of books (Merged: Bastardizing Books)

Postby JayDee » Thu Jun 24, 2010 9:05 am UTC

I saw the film of Män som hatar kvinnor (The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo) the other week. It's another for my very short list of film adaptions that are as good or better than the book. Lots of backstory and detail was cut, of course, but that was generally for the best.

Ironically I realised yesterday that the two things I loved most in the book really weren't done justice in the film. And then went and looked at the third movie (the third book has my favourite scene in the set) and the same thing. On the other hand, I swear the movie had far more realistic hacking than the novel, which just weirds me out a little. I mean, it's not a Hollywood film, but still.
The Mighty Thesaurus wrote:I believe that everything can and must be joked about.
Hawknc wrote:I like to think that he hasn't left, he's just finally completed his foe list.

Dead Tom
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 11:43 pm UTC

Re: Movie treatments of books (Merged: Bastardizing Books)

Postby Dead Tom » Sun Jul 18, 2010 4:34 am UTC

As far as the LotR movies, I have to say they did a very good job with the book. They managed to turn what is really a fictional history textbook into a truly epic movie, and still managed to capture the scale and epic-ness of the books. There where a bunch of changes, but you really can't add every single detail into a movie three movies that are already 3 hours each. The things that did annoy me where the things that where changed for no good reason. For instance, Faramir. WTF was that? And I would have like to seen Tom Bombadil in there as well. Even though it would have made no sense to anyone who had not read the book, I feel it would have been nice to give LotR fans a 5 minute segment to make us happy :mrgreen:

User avatar
Kewangji
Has Been Touched
Posts: 2254
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 5:20 pm UTC
Location: Lost in Translation
Contact:

Re: Movie treatments of books (Merged: Bastardizing Books)

Postby Kewangji » Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:49 am UTC

Do you mean that Tom Bombadil makes sense in the book, or just that including Tom Bombadil in the movies would make sense to people who read the book?
If you like my words sign up for my newsletter, Airport Tattoo Parlour: https://tinyletter.com/distantstations

The Great Hippo wrote:Nuclear bombs are like potato chips, you can't stop after just *one*

Dead Tom
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 11:43 pm UTC

Re: Movie treatments of books (Merged: Bastardizing Books)

Postby Dead Tom » Tue Jul 20, 2010 1:39 am UTC

Kewangji wrote:Do you mean that Tom Bombadil makes sense in the book, or just that including Tom Bombadil in the movies would make sense to people who read the book?

I mean that regardless of whether or not Tom made sense in the book, he's a much loved character, and I'm sure many were looking forward to seeing him in the movie.


Return to “Books”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests