What's the worst change made in a movie adaptation of a book?

[darkfuture@lemmy.world]

I Am Legend

The ending was completely and utterly different than the book, which destroyed the gut punch at the end of the book that was kind of the whole theme of the book.

I don't even remember the book as a whole. But I remember the ending. Then they Hollywooded it and it was awful.

[rabidhamster@lemmy.dbzer0.com]

As a Dune lover, I have a soft spot for the 1980s version. The thing I tell people before watching is, "this isn't Dune, this is a fever dream David Lynch had about the idea of Dune."

[argumentativemonotheist@lemmy.world]

No, it was certainly deliberate (and a little cheeky), but without any generalized hatred. Zendaya's Chani just happens to exhibit it and, as such, she cannot realistically be the idealised extremely mature, softly feminine (but realistic and pragmatic because she's a Fremen still) and self-sacrificial teenager both Muad'dib (another teenager but a princeling infused with excess, inhuman knowledge) and the story need for it to make sense. Paul needs someone of his caliber, but a yin to his yang, and OG Chani is exactly that. The sexes are different and our shortcomings come in different shades: needlessly argumentative and difficult "lippy" is to women what arrogant "mansplaining" or physical and erratical "brutish" is to men, for example.

[darkfuture@lemmy.world]

Yeah, the 80s version took a lot of liberties, most of which didn't work out. The ending specifically.

But I still like the visuals and the music and the actors more than the new movies. Yeah, I know the new ones have crazy CG visuals, but the set designs from the 80s version were just more....unique in my opinion. That made the world feel more interesting. And I liked the 80s Baron way more than the new Baron, despite really respecting Stellan Skarsgard. Kenneth McMillan played a really psychotic Baron.

[zipzoopaboop@lemmynsfw.com]

Sympathetic antagonist -> brainless monster

[phoenixz@lemmy.ca]

I believe they did so because people didn't like the original ending.

Not saying it's right, just that that's the reason why

[underreacting@literature.cafe]

I don't know if the same people are involved in this one, but I love the movie version of the Martian - I think it's a very faithful adaptation, with acceptable changes for the medium. Slightly more grandiose and optimistic ending, possibly to be palatable to a wide audience, but nothing that ruined the experience.

If it's even close to that balance of good adaptation and good movie, it will absolutely be worth watching.

[simsalabim@lemmy.world]

The religion of technology was something that I especially enjoyed in the books. There were many highlights that Goyer chose to ignore.

[rizzothesmall@sh.itjust.works]

Yeah the casting and costuming was pretty good for the most part with the very slight exception that I felt Rosamund Pike was a bit tall for the diminutive Moiraine. Apart from that I loved how faithful they were to the characters' descriptions even if they did go wildly off the rails with the story.

[breezy@lemmy.world]

Well i never knew the audio book was done by moiraine herself. But i do ageee, especially after just finishing new spring tonight everyone mentioned how short she was and i never thought to much of that difference while reading the books. I guess when she got her ageless face no one spoke to much of it.

[stringere@sh.itjust.works]

That's a really good description.

[stringere@sh.itjust.works]

Ugh yeah