I love to read and I love to watch movies, but I can't stand it when they turn books into movies. It is very few that actually are good adaptations. I dont know why they even bother anymore. What are your guy's thoughts on this.
mm...there are alot of good adaptations of books...you only need to look at the alex garland/danny boyle partnership to see that...the beach, sunshine, 28 days later
then there's been trainspotting, empire of the sun, the shining (and other notable king novels)
clockwork orange, the maltese falcon, fight club, fear and loathing in las vegas, to kill a mockingbird, watership down
__________________
http://celebrityscrapheap.blogspot.com/ blatent free advertising for a lady friend of mine's new blog...get it read
the beach is a great novel...but in my opinion i think its also a great film...it doesn't have to be an almost perfect transferal as fight club was...hence the word "adaptation"
__________________
http://celebrityscrapheap.blogspot.com/ blatent free advertising for a lady friend of mine's new blog...get it read
Lets not forget the movie that was a book that put Christian Bale on the map...Bret Easton Ellis's American Pyscho. I thoroghly enjoyed both the novel and the movie.
There are a couple that I like and few that I don't. I think The Divinci Code was a poor excuse for a movie. But I really liked Prozac Nation and Girl Interrupted. I'm in the middle of reading The Memory Keeper's Daughter and I saw that they are making THAT into a movie so I'm kind of excited about it.
yeah your right.it is very rare that they ever make good books into good movies.as someone mentioned earlier,there have been a few of them like to kill a mockingbird,the shining and watership down and tom clancys novels as well.The best adaptaion of a novel I think and is my favorite adaptation is S E Hintons TEX.The movie was dead on to the book practically. But yeah the majority of the time they mess it up.those are rare instances.I agree,they mess it up so much most the time they shouldnt even bother anymore. For instance,I saw Christine before i read the novel and I enjoyed it.Then I read the novel and NOW I hate the movie.It could have been sooooo much better.with they would redeem themselves and make a tv miniseires out of like they did with the shining.Except the shining was a total waste.the orginal jack nicholson movie was so great they should have left it alone.Most stephen king novels have been screwed up when making them into films,with they would leave them alone since they cant get it right anymore.
__________________
Spiderman is the worst comicbook movie ever,movie should have been called MAN-SPIDER. Organics are the biggest sin in hollywood history.
yeah i really enjoyed both...i hope they make a film out of "lunar park" which is essentially a sequel to american psycho...but it lends itself far better to a truer adaptation
clearly there would be no way a more accurate version of the american psycho novel would ever get made...rat tubes stuck up *****...cannibalism, chopping off lips with nail scissors...drilling out teeth and ripping the throat out through the mouth...
be a fun film to make and to watch...but it would never get past the censors
also...couldn't agree more with parker (1st time for everything) in that the tv version of the shining was utterly pointless....on its own merits it's not that bad but compared to the film it's hard to see why they even tried to out-do nicholson's performance
__________________
http://celebrityscrapheap.blogspot.com/ blatent free advertising for a lady friend of mine's new blog...get it read
KMC Community Forums
Apr 3rd, 2008 09:47 PM
