Book to movie, best?
By firewind451
@firewind451 (129)
September 25, 2008 5:33pm CST
What is your opinion on transferring books into movies and which , if any , do you consider being a job well done.
As a general rule of thumb, I have a love hate relationship with the whole idea.
Sometimes you get a great movie but, its not the book.
The lord of the rings trilogy is a prime example. Fantastic movie imho. One of the best ever. That said, it is not the story in the books. New characters and major plot lines missing.
My candidate for best adaptations is Silence of the Lambs. I think they caught the pace and characters very well.
3 responses
@firewind451 (129)
•
25 Sep 08
True. I love a good movie but, don't you find it irritating when you go to a movie adapted from a book you read, only to see parts missing? Parts you consider important.
FOr example. One of my favorite scenes in the lord of the rings trilogy was when Gandalf and company talk to Saurumann at Orthanc. That scene was glossed over. I was highly irritated. Lol
Maybe I just take these things too seriously. :)
@celestos (814)
• United States
26 Sep 08
Honestly the best movie I have ever seen that goes very close to the book is Carrie by Stephen King. You can almost follow the book with the movie word for word:)
@lamtieuyen (58)
• United States
27 Sep 08
I tend to have a love-hate relationship with this too, but it would depend. Sometimes it works if they captured the concepts of it well. I don't get irritated with details or scenes missing sometimes, but I might forgive them if it's not WAY over like "Where in the world did that come from" sort of thing. One of the examples that I find great to stab at is the Harry Potter series. I actually like the movies 1 and 2 and that was it. I admit that the special effects for the other ones were good or decent enough, but it omitted a lot of essential concepts and only made it into a typical action adventure or whatever you call it.
Surprisingly, one of the series that got adapted but I actually prefer the movies over the book is the Bourne series by Robert Ludlum. Maybe 'cause the time frame it was set in the book and not to mention some characters I rather do without. The concepts weren't way off (I meant in the essence of the Jason Bourne character in general, so not talking about the plot here). Besides, they have to modernize it after all. The fact that they still kept Jason Bourne's character so brilliant make it all the worthwhile. (But of course I know others might not agree and I totally get it since I just presented my case with my disappointment regarding HP above.) Maybe also because I watched the movies first before reading each book.
@firewind451 (129)
•
28 Sep 08
I agree on the Potter series. The first tow were the best. I really dilike the dark sets and tone of the new movies. It is no longer any fun. The first ones remined me of those great disney movies from long ago. AH well.
As to The Bourne Butchery ( you can tell I didn't like them) I actually fell asleep watching the first one.
Maybe its because I loved the books so much. I actually collect Ludlum firsts. :)
@NuclearRabbit (650)
• United States
25 Sep 08
Interview with a vampire, The Shawshank Redemption and The Neverending story were all books I think. The book for The Neverending Story was utter crap though.
@firewind451 (129)
•
25 Sep 08
How did that end? I forgot. Lol.
Shawshank Redemption was a good one I forgot about that one.
