What's the worst change made in a movie adaptation of a book?
-
I don’t see why it wouldn’t have been as successful
From what I heard the book had a lot more deep science and chaos theory, but I never read it. If true, nobody's taking their kids to that.
-
It's still my favorite version. Though, I still wonder if Jowarsky's Dune would have been better.
Jodorowsky you mean?
-
vaguely gestures at World War Z
The best part of that movie is Peter Capaldi being listed as "W.H.O. Doctor" in the credits.
-
Ah, I missed that. Clever.
-
Just pick a scene from The Hobbit movies and there's your answer. Any scene.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Nononono, the singing dwarfes were absolutely true to the book. And Gandalph looking at Galadriel like a Schoolboy with a crush on his friends older Sister was definitely not in the books, but I loved it.
-
Ah, I missed that. Clever.
It's unclear if it was intentional or just a coincidence. World War Z was released two months before Capaldi was announced as The Doctor.
-
Not a movie, but a show. "Foundation".
Look, I get it, if you want to tell your own sci fi story that has nothing to do with Asimov, great! Good for you!
But don't pretend it's Foundation.
It’s three shows intertwined into one, and it feels as if three teams wrote them independently. They are completely different, the only thing in common is reusing Asomov’s Foundation names. It totally sucks.
-
Seek the truth, always.
So glad it got cancelled. What Rafe did to the story was abysmal. Great casting, filming, and set work, but the writing was not great. I just hope a great animation shop can get the rights from Tor or whoever one day to do it justice.
That said, the Rhuidean episode was superb.
-
I love the Dark Tower series and hadn't seen the movie yet. They dropped Susannah out ENTIRELY? Seriously???
I agree though with the commenter to which you replied. Just go in knowing it is going to hurt to watch, but in a genuinely entertaining way.
-
Jodorowsky you mean?
Yeah. That guy.
-
It's still my favorite version. Though, I still wonder if Jowarsky's Dune would have been better.
Have you watched the Sci-fi channel miniseries? I think that one (especially since it also has Messiah and Children) is the best. Not the best graphics, or filming, or acting, but the best as a whole.
-
I'd say Denis' is waaaaaaay worse, they ruined Chani and added some nonsense subplot in part two as well... it's just prettier.
I loved Arrival though, and I do feel like most disruptive changes in his Dunes were studio notes because it would be more relatable to "modern audiences".
wrote last edited by [email protected]I think it can still recover, but I felt the same way after leaving the theater for part 2. I was confused why they decided to change it that much. It's supposed to make her seem intelligent and independent or something, but honestly it just make her seem nieve. They discuss Paul needing to do something like this, and she knows his mother's position was the same, but was still his father's only love.
It's bad enough that they cut out an entire portion of their lives where they have a son together, and lose that son to the Harkonnen. Then they do what they did at the end and it's just wrong.
It's definitely the easiest to watch though, and I don't know that it's less accurate than 1984's (Paul calls in rain after he wins the battle?). The miniseries is most accurate though.
-
vaguely gestures at World War Z
When they announced a movie with Brad Pitt, I knew it would be bad. The book reads like a multi épisode TV show without a main character (and it could be a great adaptation).
When I pirated the movie version... It was so bad I regretted wasting bandwidth for that
-
Literally every single detail of the Eragon movie. God I hope someone actually adapts it well some day. Not that it's the world's best prose or anything but I truly believe it would be a great series with the proper director and cast. You know, where literally any of them had read and appreciated the source material.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I don't know if it'll be better but there is an Eragon series in development for Disney+
-
OK, here's the thing. Overall, Peter Jackson's LOTR trilogy is extremely good. I think it's the best Tolkien adaptation we're likely to ever get.
HOWEVER.
The random "Arwen is dying!" subplot was incredibly fucking stupid and while it didn't ruin the movies for me, it did dampen my enjoyment of them. There had to be a better way to get more screentime for Liv Tyler, surely.
That's when Aragorn rode back to Rivendell when they were almost at Mordor, and then back to Mordor again, right?
-
So glad it got cancelled. What Rafe did to the story was abysmal. Great casting, filming, and set work, but the writing was not great. I just hope a great animation shop can get the rights from Tor or whoever one day to do it justice.
That said, the Rhuidean episode was superb.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Seek the truth, always.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Wanted. It's a completely different story, in the movie it's about a loser guy discovering destiny murders that are ordered to kill people by a Loom. The comic is about a loser guy discovering a secret society of super-villans because he also has a superpower.
But I would also like to present a counter-example. Watchmen, the ending is different from the comic to the movie, and I much prefer the movie ending. In the comic the plan by the villain is to make an alien-like monster appear out of thin air, because this will make humankind unite, in the movie his plan is to blow out the major cities in the world and make it look like Dr. Manhattan did it because then humanity will unite both out of fear and trying to stop Dr. Manhattan from doing it again. I never questioned the comic, but after watching the movie I got the nagging thought of "why would an alien appearing unite mankind? They don't know if the alien destroying stuff was purposeful, them thinking Dr. Manhattan did it is better because they know it was intentional and done by someone who knows who they are"
-
I'm a little surprised at that response because American Psycho is one of the most true to the source material movies I've ever seen. Whole passages were lifted and turned directly into dialog. Sure all of those white men were supposed to be corporate clones in the books but in a movie characters have to be visually distinct that's just the nature of the mediums
No hamster scene though.
-
From what I heard the book had a lot more deep science and chaos theory, but I never read it. If true, nobody's taking their kids to that.
I read it 3 times. When I was like 12. Chaos theory and science were certainly aspects; aspects of an exciting, edge of your seat, smart, well-plotted thriller, with engaging and relatable characters. It wasn’t a kids book, and doesn’t need to be a kids movie. This may shock you, but movies don’t have to be for kids in order to be successful.
-
All the adaptations of I Am Legend are bad, but 2007 movie was insulting. It gave the illusion of following the book, but then did a u-tutn and completely changed the meaning of the story and the title itself.
In the movie the protagonist becomes a legend because he sacrifices himself to cure vampirism.
In the book he is the last man in a world of vampires, he kills vampires, and understands that he is like a legendary monster that kills people in their sleep. He is then executed.
Yeah, the book vampires were much more fleshed out. In the movie they were just barely-sentient beasts, primarily running off of instinct. They only seemingly had some basic higher-level reasoning. His primary struggle was surviving while surrounded by bloodthirsty animals.
In the book, they were a full blown society with their own culture. When the people around him changed, he was suddenly a stranger in a brand new culture. The point was that in the old society, vampires were the thing that went bump in the night. But in the new society, he was the monster that parents told their kids to watch out for.
