|
|
Post by chocobochica on Aug 31, 2015 4:57:19 GMT -7
Ok. So we all are familiar with book-to-movie film adaptations. In recent years, it seems Hollywood has run out of legit new ideas and is either remaking everything or just straight up swiping scripts from books. That being said, I'm an avid reader myself, and have seen a few really good ones.
I made the terrible mistake this weekend of watching the movie Horns, with Daniel Radcliffe. I had a huge interest in this film because I love the book- Stephen King's son, Joe Hill, is a wonderful author and has some great stuff out there.
I want those 2 hours of my life back.
Even if they hadn't completely butchered the book, it was still one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Just...bad news bears.
What's your favorite book to movie film adaptation? And what's the worst?
|
|
|
|
Post by DarthJommu on Aug 31, 2015 7:46:41 GMT -7
Well, because i'm from Sweden i'll choose a swedish book called Ronja Rövardotter/ Ronia the robber's daughter (1981, written by Astrid Lindgren) That was made into a movie 1984  I will have to think about the worst ^^ So if someone is interested in swedish movies I will recommend that one :3 |
|
|
|
Post by Joseph DeGolyer on Aug 31, 2015 9:29:50 GMT -7
It's not a recent trend in Hollywood. They've been doing remakes and adaptations since the beginning. Many big films of the 1950's, including Ben Hur and The Ten Commandments were remakes of silent-era epics. In the 30's and 40's it was popular to base movies off of plays, including that of Casablanca. They've been doing book adaptations since the beginning of movies. Doctor Caligari was an unofficial adaptation of Dracula, and most of the big movies of the 70's and 90's were based on bestsellers. The 80's was interesting. A lot of old and dead television shows started to get adapted into movies. This trends continued into the 90's, and included hits such as The Adam's Family, and the Untouchables. Since Spiderman became a mega-hit in 2002, Hollywood has continued to successfully adapt comic book movies.
There are so many classic films based on previous material, but you wouldn't know it while watching the movie. Movies are movies, and in order for the movie to be decent, it can never follow the material it was based on perfectly. I think it's best to stay away from adaptations to books you love, until you hear if it's any good from other folks. Lord of the Rings does not follow the books all that well, and adds things at every turn, but since the movie works, not too many people care that it took detours from the story they had in their mind.
I would say the best adaptation is The Godfather. The book it was based on was kind of a trashy novel, and FFC took the plot, and made it high art.
The worst? I don't know, I'm too much of a movie lover to allow myself to care about books I've read, and make comparisons to it while I sit in the theater...
Worst adaptation of a previous movie: Godzilla (1998). Piece of shit.
|
|
|
|
Post by krinital on Aug 31, 2015 10:32:25 GMT -7
I personally have not seen a lot of remakes that were absolute trash that cam from books. The only ones I saw from books are Percy jackson and the lightning thief and maze runner. While I thing Percy jackson the first installment was pretty good the second one was total crap - Percy jackson and the island of monsters. As for maze runner it was quite good. I look forward to the sequel - maze runner the scorch trials. He only other remakes I have seen are robo cop and the lord of the rings are all I can think of and both were meh and I could care less.
|
|
|
|
Post by chocobochica on Aug 31, 2015 10:34:36 GMT -7
It's not a recent trend in Hollywood. They've been doing remakes and adaptations since the beginning. Many big films of the 1950's, including Ben Hur and The Ten Commandments were remakes of silent-era epics. In the 30's and 40's it was popular to base movies off of plays, including that of Casablanca. They've been doing book adaptations since the beginning of movies. Doctor Caligari was an unofficial adaptation of Dracula, and most of the big movies of the 70's and 90's were based on bestsellers. The 80's was interesting. A lot of old and dead television shows started to get adapted into movies. This trends continued into the 90's, and included hits such as The Adam's Family, and the Untouchables. Since Spiderman became a mega-hit in 2002, Hollywood has continued to successfully adapt comic book movies. There are so many classic films based on previous material, but you wouldn't know it while watching the movie. Movies are movies, and in order for the movie to be decent, it can never follow the material it was based on perfectly. I think it's best to stay away from adaptations to books you love, until you hear if it's any good from other folks. Lord of the Rings does not follow the books all that well, and adds things at every turn, but since the movie works, not too many people care that it took detours from the story they had in their mind. Huh. Didn't know most of that- then again, I'm not a huge movie buff. I would agree that Spider Man was definitely the comic book movie that started this whole crazy train of comic book movies, which shows no signs of slowing down. As for specifically movies based off novels- that trend rears its head most notably in teen books, where every freaking movie anymore marketed towards the 13 to 18 crowd was a book first. For 2014 alone, if you include comic books as "book" adaptations, 9 of the top 20 domestic grossing movies were based on books. If you include American Sniper, which was a book but was also a true story, it's 10. I guess being a reader, my default inclination is to prefer the book versions of things ^.^ |
|
|
|
Post by krinital on Aug 31, 2015 10:37:36 GMT -7
I am also a avid reader and will always like the book version better. As for horns I just remembered watching it and yeah your right it's pretty bad though I never read the book I know the movie was terrible .
|
|
|
|
Post by Judge Gabranth on Aug 31, 2015 15:46:55 GMT -7
It's probably split 50/50 weather if Game of Thrones is a great adaptation. I watched the first two seasons before reading the books, obviously I love the show, but I now love the books too. I can view each separately and enjoy both, but there are THOSE fans who hate the show now because they won't just accept the show for what it is. Yeah there are characters and plot lines I'd love to see on TV but that was GRRM intentions when he wrote it, to make it unfilmable. My only complaint is that Dorne could have been done better, other than that, best show and books out!
|
|
|
|
Post by banedrom on Aug 31, 2015 17:11:22 GMT -7
I personally have not seen a lot of remakes that were absolute trash that cam from books. The only ones I saw from books are Percy jackson and the lightning thief and maze runner. While I thing Percy jackson the first installment was pretty good the second one was total crap - Percy jackson and the island of monsters. As for maze runner it was quite good. I look forward to the sequel - maze runner the scorch trials. He only other remakes I have seen are robo cop and the lord of the rings are all I can think of and both were meh and I could care less. Krinital! No way. I read all of the Percy Jackson books, from both the original five and the heroes of Olympus series. That movie was no bueno... I was so appalled at what they did I finished it and was so sad that they ruined a potentially awesome franchise. |
|
|
|
Post by banedrom on Aug 31, 2015 17:17:25 GMT -7
There was recently a movie based on a research experiment. The Stanford Prison experiment. It was really limited release though and I've already got my preorder in for the blu Ray.
I'm shocked no one brought up Goblet of Fire... First Blood was based on a book as well and the book was so much better, although I really like that movie.
The Men Who Stare at Goats is based on a non fiction work about a sub group in the military that dropped acid, at the government's tab, and focused on pacifism to end world conflict. It was entertaining but I've never found someone who could sit through it. It's pretty far out there...
|
|
|
|
Post by Shinryu on Sept 1, 2015 1:23:34 GMT -7
Lord of the Rings movies might be the best and the worst might be The Hunger Games the books were good although a tamer version of Battle Royale. The movies suck the directors are obsessed with shaky cam and toning the violence down so its basically PG and its supposed to be an action series and instead they make it focus too much on romance in the movies and its alway Peeta! Katniss! Peeta! Katniss! ugh. Oh and I never watched them but I assume the Twilight movies suck and might be worse than the books. Take a look at this garbage. O_oThat shaky cam is unbearable how am I supposed to enjoy the action? I hope Gary Ross the director feels like a loser for not even understanding the basics of camerawork he made Big, PleasantVille and Seabiscuit and then does this? What a joke! I take steadier videos on a phone while jogging. If that wasn't enough they felt the need to add to the suffering and add some high piercing hum during the entire sequence so not only can you not see the action clearly BUT you can't even hear people talking, yelling or screaming to each other... words cannot describe my anger at this     |
|
|
|
Post by krinital on Sept 1, 2015 8:25:53 GMT -7
I personally have not seen a lot of remakes that were absolute trash that cam from books. The only ones I saw from books are Percy jackson and the lightning thief and maze runner. While I thing Percy jackson the first installment was pretty good the second one was total crap - Percy jackson and the island of monsters. As for maze runner it was quite good. I look forward to the sequel - maze runner the scorch trials. He only other remakes I have seen are robo cop and the lord of the rings are all I can think of and both were meh and I could care less. Krinital! No way. I read all of the Percy Jackson books, from both the original five and the heroes of Olympus series. That movie was no bueno... I was so appalled at what they did I finished it and was so sad that they ruined a potentially awesome franchise. First off let me commend you for being able to bear with my many typo's and slight grammar mistakes.  I see where you are coming from and like I said earlier I think it was pretty good but not good or great if I could give it a rating I would give it 4.5 out of 10. Would I watch it again...... No! Definitely not and even more so for part 2. But as a movie in itself it covers the basics of the story pretty well but matching it to the book it's bad. |
|
|
|
Post by lightsage on Sept 24, 2015 0:34:35 GMT -7
I'll start with best first.
The best book-to-film adaption is "How to Train Your Dragon". This is probably the only adaption I've seen in my life that I can honestly say is MUCH better than the book it is based on. The books are obviously for little children, and rely heavily on potty humor. Toothless is not nearly as cool as he is in the movies. In the books, he's more like a lazy cat... and about the same size as a cat too. Instead of Hiccup and Toothless forming their amazing friendship like in the film, the book Hiccup and Toothless "friendship" is more like Toothless seeing how much he can ignore and get away with and Hiccup begging "Please stop Toothless." Toothless: *ignore completely*
Okay... and now for the worst. I'm going to have to go with the two films that have been made from the Percy Jackson books series. The first film was so bad that you'd think that the director read like the first three chapters and then said "I got this" and went off on his own tangent. When an adaption completely forgets who the bad guy is (the two people who were the bad guys in the film are not only good guys, but two of the biggest heroes in the whole freaking series!) And then the second movie came out, at which point someone told the director "Um... you know the bad guy is actually this character... that you completely ignored..." And then the god-awful ending. The film decided that they would just go ahead and resurrect the bad guy for the climax of the film a couple of films early. So the big bad is resurrected, and IMMEDIATELY betrays all of his minions and then is sealed up again. And now we are expected to believe that the big bad's minions (after being immediately betrayed by the guy they worked so hard to resurrect) to just say... "Well... let's try it again a few more times until we get it right! What are the odds he'll betray us all again?"
|
|
I will have to think about the worst ^^ So if someone is interested in swedish movies I will recommend that one :3
I see where you are coming from and like I said earlier I think it was pretty good but not good or great if I could give it a rating I would give it 4.5 out of 10. Would I watch it again...... No! Definitely not and even more so for part 2. But as a movie in itself it covers the basics of the story pretty well but matching it to the book it's bad. 