|
|
|
|
|
Romantic Conversationalist
|
Posted: Sun May 08, 2005 2:42 pm
This topic was originally posted by phobia2001 in our guild thread. I hope she doesn't mind that I'm re-posting it . . .phobia2001 Allright on the subject of books made into movies- I think it should be a requirement to read the book before seeing the movie. Just because I'm tired of all these "fans" to talk like they KNOW the book when all they've done is seen the movie 3 or 4 times... Same goes on the subject of videogames made into movies... but that's for another thread entirely. What do you guys think? Should you always read the book before seeing the movie? To add to that, what are some of your favorite/least favorite movies that are based on books?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 13, 2005 6:43 am
Yes you should read the book. Many times the movies change a character's personality for the movie. In books characters are mentally set for a reason. You may think one way about a person in a book and then the movie may completely change your view and vise versa. One book that I cannot stand that was made into a movie is Jurassic Park. I simply do not like the idea of what they did to Allan Grant.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 13, 2005 10:01 am
I think that the quality really depends on the film, the film always changes the plot, maybe even slightly, but it always changes the plot from the book. Films like Harry Potter are effective however others are not. It really depends on the film director.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 14, 2005 2:05 pm
Today I read the book Phantom of the Opera...and then saw the new moive. I liked it. I liked the transition from written word to silver screen. True I had seen the old movies but I have never read the book. I believe that is one of the only books turned movies that I like.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Romantic Conversationalist
|
Posted: Sat May 14, 2005 8:24 pm
YomikoReadmanPaper Today I read the book Phantom of the Opera...and then saw the new moive. I liked it. I liked the transition from written word to silver screen. True I had seen the old movies but I have never read the book. I believe that is one of the only books turned movies that I like. That's because Andrew Lloyd Webber did such a good job on the musical. 3nodding Did you know, though, that when he first went to create the Phantom musical, he hadn't read the book? It was only months after his original idea that he read it, loved it, and started writing it again.
Aside from the first version that Lon Chaney did, I haven't enjoyed another movie version up until this new one came out.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 20, 2005 10:50 am
Whalerider. That was one of the best movies I've ever seen. I also read the book..The only case I've ever seen where the movie won.
As for worst, Ella Enchanted. That was a good book. They ruined it with a mixture of Disney Comedy and talking snakes.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon May 23, 2005 5:38 am
Oh I've got one, though it's not really my opinion. My little brother, my mother, and I are rather in love with the "Series of Unfortunate Events" books. We all saw the movie and feelings were mild, except my little brother, he was outraged!!! Utterly hated it!
Oh here he is now! Evan can I get a quote!!!
" stare It screwed up stressed scream the FRECKEN BOOK evil !!!"
...thank you Evan rolleyes
Anyway, I'm rather neutral on the subject mrgreen
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue May 24, 2005 7:41 am
It's not wise to judge a book by its movie adaptation, apart from that it's a whole different medium there are usually significant changes. But then again there are movie adaptation who follows the book very closely. For example "A Clockwork Orange" and "Fight Club".
My favourite author Robert A. Heinlein have had very bad luck when it comes to movie adaptations. The two movies that were done in the 90's, "Starship Troopers" and "The Puppet Master" completely slaughtered the books that they're based on.
There are however a couple of books that I think turned out better as movies but that is because changes that I though were for the better were done.
"Bram Stoker's Dracula" by Coppola makes Dracula more sympathic by giving him motives that you can understand instead of simply being a bloodthirsty beast that wants to destroy everthing.
I prefer Cronenberg's movie adaptation of "Naked Lunch" simply because it actually has something that resembles a plotline that you can follow.
"The Ninth Gate" follows the book "El Club Dumas" up to a point and it's this change that I prefer.
While "Fight Club" follows the book closely there are a couple of changes that I prefer. The biggest change is probably how he meets Tyler Durden and it's still true to the book because the content of their dialogue exist in the book as well.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 29, 2005 1:36 pm
The Lord of the Rings it was an aASWESOME BOOK but the movie was centered on Aragon a little too much and they changed the plot quite a bit. the story is about Aragon, but told more from Frod's veiw and the main plot is how Frodo destros the Ring, not how Middle Earth fought against Sauron and Saruman. Too much battle, not enough Frodo
Lauren: You really are a LOTR freak
oh shut up
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2005 7:42 pm
I think one of the worst books into movies was Queen of the Damned by Anne Rice. The only part that they followed the plot with was the concert. However, what happened to Louis? Is Armand the blonde? *ect, ect, ect* It was jsut a horrible movie, simply put. Has anyone else read the book & seen teh movie?
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2005 9:13 pm
A bad example of sticking to the book is Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. It's an ok movie, it just slaughters the flavor of the book. The book is a satire against Earth, and in it the Earth is destroyed. In the movie, it comes back, and everyone is happy again. Plus, they stick in a cheesy love story. Plus, they stick in a stupid side plot so that they can save the love interest from mortal danger. stare
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2005 8:56 pm
Always read the book. I saw Phantom of the Opera before reading the book, and had no idea what a truly terrible movie for sticking to the plot it is. I have never read Hitchiker's guide to the galaxy, but that's about what I expected. Honestly, even the Star Wars books are cooler than the movies. (The original ones by George Lucas, not the stupid people who just put Star Wars on a book to sell it) One example of a movie being better than a book, the only one that I've ever run across: Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, with Gene Wilder. That is the coolest movie, and the book was pretty awful (to me). The dark undertones to the movie are so cool; Willy Wonka is human, but somehow fey and strange. I even liked the title change, because the movie was about Willy Wonka more than Charlie. WinglessFairy The Lord of the Rings it was an aASWESOME BOOK but the movie was centered on Aragon a little too much and they changed the plot quite a bit. the story is about Aragon, but told more from Frod's veiw and the main plot is how Frodo destros the Ring, not how Middle Earth fought against Sauron and Saruman. Too much battle, not enough Frodo Lauren: You really are a LOTR freak oh shut up See, I thought just the opposite; even in the books I don't like Frodo's story after he splits with the Fellowship, and in the movies he was such a whiny little boy that I didn't even want to see him. I also think that one of the many points of the trilogy was that the greatest glory does not always go to those who are doing the most important work. The greatest things are done with the least fanfare.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:10 am
Jesse_Yuywell I think one of the worst books into movies was Queen of the Damned by Anne Rice. The only part that they followed the plot with was the concert. However, what happened to Louis? Is Armand the blonde? *ect, ect, ect* It was jsut a horrible movie, simply put. Has anyone else read the book & seen teh movie? They managed to butcher two whole books as a lot of the content was from the book "The Vampire Lestat" as well. What I disliked the most was that Akasha had turned into a simple minded antagonist with nothing but destruction on her mind instead of being the idealist that she is in the book (I don't think that there are any value in her ideals though).
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 06, 2005 1:27 am
sarcasticarcher A bad example of sticking to the book is Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. It's an ok movie, it just slaughters the flavor of the book. The book is a satire against Earth, and in it the Earth is destroyed. In the movie, it comes back, and everyone is happy again. Plus, they stick in a cheesy love story. Plus, they stick in a stupid side plot so that they can save the love interest from mortal danger. stare Douglas Adams once spoke of his movie version as yet another development in the storyline of the book. If you've seen the mini-series and/or heard the radio play, they're all a bit different. You can here most of the radio play if you Click here. Make sure you check out the link to H2g2 as well, which is another idea of Adams. If you poke around the above link, and elsewhere on the internet, you can find articles on Adams involvement in the movie and how he felt about it, you can also find lots and lots of articles with people ranting and raving about how much they hate it. I should talk though, after my first viewing of the movie I hated it. But I calmed myself down and read/remember Adams and his view points on life, the universe and everythng (heh heh). OK. I'm going to shut up now...mid rant. I'm sorry.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 09, 2005 11:01 pm
Some movies caused me to read their books. I find that I enjoyed the film adaption of The General's Daughter better than the novel.
Other times it is the prospect of a movie coming out that spawns me to read the books and then find the film very disappointing because it doesn't hold that charm that the book had. The Virgin Suicides, anyone?
Some books whose film adaptions that I also enjoyed are Gone With the Wind (yes, I know that a LOT was cut out of the story, but I still liked it nonetheless) and A Time to Kill.
I cannot end this post without mentioning what a riot it was to see the movie version of The Good Earth, but knowing that it was filmed in 1937 helps to understand why the actors are Caucasian and not Chinese like they're suppose to be. That and the fact that the last 1/3 of the book was left out while minutes were wasted on pointless footage of the locust attack and the storm blowing the harvest away.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|