37 replies to this topic

[Aethix]

Me and my girlfriend are both pretty big movie buffs, but at the same time love to read. Lately we've been having a pretty big discussion about our distaste for books being turned into movies. The most recent "big" book title to be turned into a movie is, one of our favorite book series, Twilight.

Twilight is an amazing book and I'm really looking forward to the movie. She, however, is very upset that they decided to make the book into a movie as it will "ruin her view of the characters." We can both agree that the movie will not compare to the book; however, I enjoy watching movies that derived from a book as it furthers my perception of characters and being a visual person it really helps me get back in touch with books I've read in the past.

So what do you guys think? Do you enjoy movies that are derived from books or are you like my girlfriend who absolutely hates when they put your favorite books on the big screen?


( I'm sorry if this is not the right place, I looked and this seemed most fitting.)

[krazygoddess]

I get in moods where I love to read, My favorite author would have to be Stephen King, And I will not watch any movies based on his books until I have read the book. It does not bother me when they turn books into movies. But sometimes you have to wonder if the producers or whoever wrote the movie even read the book, sometimes they are so far off from the book how can they even name it after the book they can be so very different that its ridiculous. But I usually end up watching them anyway. But I would have to sa when they turn books into movies the books are by far better then the movie, and I have no problem imagining the characters and what they look like or how they act.

[dwolters]

I absolutely HATE it when they turn books into movies! I can't think of one movie that has been a book, that surpassed the quality of the book. Let me give you the best example I can think of: Battlefield Earth! In my opinion, it is one of the best scifi books out there (even though it was written by scientology's founder). In the box office, it completely smashed. They ended up pulling it out of the theaters! This book has had a contract to be a movie for 20 YEARS and it completely goes down the crapper! Another one that I can't stand: Interview with a Vampire. Great book, OK movie. The movie leaves way too much out IMO. In fact this is the real problem with turning books into movies; there is usually way too much content and they can't cram it all into the movie, leaving something to be desired.
Ok one more example: Night Watch--These are pretty good books, but the movie (filmed in Russia), doesn't capture the atmosphere of the book at all, or basically anything else for that matter.
So in closing: STOP TURNING GREAT BOOKS INTO CRAPPY MOVIES!

[kobra500]

Just read the book first and it will be fine, Thats what I've discovered anyways, the movies are usually based on but never live up to the book. But if you see the film first then there is a chance that you won't enjoy the book.

[HyBriD54]

Hmm. So many books are being turned into movies it’s scary.
The one I’m quite apprehensive about is the Uglies trilogy by Scott Westerfeld. It has a lot of stuff in it that is really hard to portray via the screen. Plus the books are awesome and I find that movies tend to do horrible things to books. -.- But I’m still going to watch it XD.

One book-turned-movie which I think was not that good was Stormbreaker. It turned out so much more ridiculous and farfetched than the book – and they changed so many things it wasn’t funny. Somehow the tone of the story changed to realistic and believable (as believable as 14-year-old spy can get anyway) into childish and lame.

[hellosoliloquy]

I didn't like Twilight, to be honest. I've read all three and do own the last one (...Eclipse?), but I'm sort of strange and have to finish things I've started.

Weirdly enough, I'm kind of looking forward to the movie. The whole thing might be more easily digestible for me when in motion.

[Csshih]

I would like to say, most movies that are made from books are inaccurate from the story, and most of the time, not very good. (well, then again, if the movie followed every single plot twist of the book, it would be extremely long.) All the movies leave too much out of the story and the only people that should watch them is people who have not read the books.
( That's why I always wait until a harry potter movie comes out and I watch it before reading the book, it helps dim my hatred toward these movies)

[Khala]

Turning a good book into a movie isn't that great, I mean, can't they just think of thier plots?
Most movies based on books are made by people other than the author(s).

A movie can change the way how you thought a character looked, like the books holes, Stanley was suppose to be extremely overweight, or somewhat like that.

[samspeer]

dwolters, on May 29 2008, 07:32 PM, said:

I can't think of one movie that has been a book, that surpassed the quality of the book.

Now, don't get me wrong-- I agree with you. Seeing a film version of one of your favorite books can be extremely irritating. The fact is, that films and novels come from completely different worlds. For example: when you write a play, you use the strength of the play-- dialogue. When you write a book, you use the strength of the book-- description. But when you write a screenplay, you write to your strength, and that is action.

When a film student is taught how to write a movie, they are often given specific parameters that will help them write a "seat of the pants" movie. Most books are, let's face it, not so much thrilling as enthralling. Film authors have to take the book and make it as exciting to watch as it was to read. To do this, they have to cut massive sections out and rewrite whole characters. They have to foreshadow things differently, and present the book in a different medium. Next to zero films give a perfect imitation of the book.

Now, as for the above quote. dwolters, I see your point. But I beg to differ. That awful process of changing book to film is usually detrimental, especially to one who has read the book. But there is one movie that was better than the book. Christmas with the Kranks. Sorry, John Grisham, but Skipping Christmas sucked. And the movie they made out of it didn't. Really.

[bangms]

Wow, I'm surprised that many people don't like books turned into movies. I, on the other hand, don't get irritated when they get turned into movies. Movies made from books are just interpretations of the book from a directors standpoint. They're just trying to reach people in the same way the book was meant to. Well, money is also a big play in this, but I think it just gives readers a way to visualize what's going on. Even though some movies don't always stick to the book's plot/descriptions, they're just entertaining to watch. I'm not one of those people who sees a movie and starts critiquing how the movie didn't match the book, I just go to be entertained. Of course there are times when the movie is a total slaughter on the book, but generally, movies adapted from books don't bother me.

[bishoujo]

I would like to watch movies if the book is a little too heavy for me. I thought the Lord of the Rings movies are a great adaptation of the book. They not only helped me to visualize the story better but I also thought they were relevant to the book, and were everything that I pictured, or a better version of what I pictured. The only grouse I had was the extra romance scenes and some characters that were cut out, but I understand how romance is so important to hollywood *rollseyes* and that it's difficult to squeeze such a heavy book into 3 movies, so overall, I still think its great.

There are some movie adaptations that really irritate me. The Narnia movies were disappointing to me. The 2nd one was even more boring and darker. If a movie is found to be less interesting and fun than a book, then the movie production team needs to do some serious reflection. The Memoirs of a Geisha movie just became a horrible sappy romance story and all the costumes were wrong, wrong, wrong! They believe they left out the most important theme/message of the book, so that's one of the most appalling crimes in a book to movie adaptation.

Basically for me, if the adaptation is good, I will like it. If it removes/alters plots and characters for no apparent reason, I'll be upset and extremely irritated. If directors want to do a book adaptation, jolly well stick to the book. If they want to be 'creative' about it, they should get a brand new script.

[etycto]

Aethix, on May 28 2008, 12:07 AM, said:

Me and my girlfriend are both pretty big movie buffs, but at the same time love to read. Lately we've been having a pretty big discussion about our distaste for books being turned into movies. The most recent "big" book title to be turned into a movie is, one of our favorite book series, Twilight.

Twilight is an amazing book and I'm really looking forward to the movie. She, however, is very upset that they decided to make the book into a movie as it will "ruin her view of the characters." We can both agree that the movie will not compare to the book; however, I enjoy watching movies that derived from a book as it furthers my perception of characters and being a visual person it really helps me get back in touch with books I've read in the past.

So what do you guys think? Do you enjoy movies that are derived from books or are you like my girlfriend who absolutely hates when they put your favorite books on the big screen?
( I'm sorry if this is not the right place, I looked and this seemed most fitting.)

from what i've experienced whenever you read a book and then see it's movie normaly the movie is bad but i cant say that comes out the same for every book-to-movies.
but in twilight's case i hear its going to be bad. two of my friends love the series but when they heard about the movie and saw who was going to do the acting they said it was going to be bad. though i never read the book but since they have i can trust their opinion.

[thorne]

I'm usually not a fan of movies made from books...I find that the book is often much more detailed and gives you a better chance to get to know the characters. I really dislike watching the movie before reading the book since it ruins the ending of the book and doesn't give me the opportunity to imagine things as I would have if I hadn't seen the movie first. I refused to watch a movie version of Jane Eyre, my favorite book, because I knew that it would never, ever be as good.

On the other hand, if the book is a drama, then I enjoy seeing different movie versions of it, provided the script is kept in full. It's interesting to see the interpretations, and this way the story doesn't get cut or warped.

[TheKoolAidGuy]

Some movies taken from books are good but there is a great variety that are just horible take into example the eragon movie those of us that read the book where completely horrified of the movie that movie was horrible. People that didn't even read the book say it was "Ok"

All in all it just depends on how good the book was and on the people that produce the movie plus how much the author lets them use.

To ansewer the question does it iritate me yes.

Edited by TheKoolAidGuy, 29 June 2008 - 01:12 AM.

[LadyAshk]

bishoujo, on Jun 28 2008, 02:12 PM, said:

I would like to watch movies if the book is a little too heavy for me. I thought the Lord of the Rings movies are a great adaptation of the book. They not only helped me to visualize the story better but I also thought they were relevant to the book, and were everything that I pictured, or a better version of what I pictured. The only grouse I had was the extra romance scenes and some characters that were cut out, but I understand how romance is so important to hollywood *rollseyes* and that it's difficult to squeeze such a heavy book into 3 movies, so overall, I still think its great.

There are some movie adaptations that really irritate me. The Narnia movies were disappointing to me. The 2nd one was even more boring and darker. If a movie is found to be less interesting and fun than a book, then the movie production team needs to do some serious reflection. The Memoirs of a Geisha movie just became a horrible sappy romance story and all the costumes were wrong, wrong, wrong! They believe they left out the most important theme/message of the book, so that's one of the most appalling crimes in a book to movie adaptation.

Basically for me, if the adaptation is good, I will like it. If it removes/alters plots and characters for no apparent reason, I'll be upset and extremely irritated. If directors want to do a book adaptation, jolly well stick to the book. If they want to be 'creative' about it, they should get a brand new script.

I think the same too ...especially with Lord of the Rings. That book was s o heavy for me that I thought I'd take atleast 3 months to wade through it , plus some time for the appendices and history stuff (I got the Omnibus edition). But the movie made it so much more simpler for me - the musical renditions in the movie was also out of this world.
However, I would not say that i am too pleased with the Harry potter series of movies that they are pumping out. Oh, sure , I accept that the actors are doing a good job of it; but after having read the book, I don't find it so easy to digest the way they make such cuts in the movie.
I recently discovered another delightful phenomenon - known as "Audiobooks". They often bring the characters alive, but some just kill the book off in one chop. I would recommend that one go for the dramatized versions of books, or those given by Audible. So many others I have downloaded are so staccato.

[Bluebear]

I am fine with it. I often read the books first, so even though I have my own view it kind of gets combined with the film. What I hate is when they change things in the films, or they jump over things. Like in the Harry Potter films, it is so many things that they do not care to mention! I know that it would just take up time, but I really do not think that viewers would mind the film being 30 minutes longer. I know I would not.

But I think that people that decide to turn books into films, should care more about the book. Even though it is "based on the book" they could focus a bit more on it and maybe actually learn the meaning of it. They kill so many visions about how the characters are and such things. But if people do not want to ruin their visions and memories - do not watch the film. It is as simple as that.

[netmarkethub]

Ya ... many people don't like books turned into movies.

[KeeperMustDie]

Yes I do enjoy movies that are derived from books. Of course not all such movies is worth of book, but I understand that the movies and books is totally different things and after You watch the movie You may want to read the book, it makes more fun to see same story from different sides and then compare it.

[HyBriD54]

Hmm, you've got some good points. Actually, that's what happened with me and A Series of Unfortunate Events. I watched the movie, liked it, then read the books. I thought both were pretty good but you always lose (as well as gain) something when you translate something from page to screen...

[moutonoir]

With the Series of Unfortunate Events movie especially, you lose all the references and humor the author includes in the writing of the book. This was also the case with the Princess Bride. I saw the movie first and I had no idea that the book was actually humorous, until I read it. Then I wished that the movie had somehow been able to incorporate that into it, since it really is what made the book interesting.

[Ajant]

Many people would never read all those books so the only way for them to see the story is the through the movie. Having that in mind turning good books into movies is a good practice. Also coming up with a good plot is not an easy thing so turning to books makes a lot of sense for this reason alone. Another positive with this trend is that many people see the movie they like and then go and find the book on which it was based.

Some times movie can be good though it has little to do with original book's plot. For instance Starship troopers by Robert Henlien is a great and complex book with little action and a lot of character development and philosophical views by the author. Movie on the other hand is pure non-stop action with a little romance and humor. Now, I'm not the fan of action movies, I don't remember the last time I watched a movie that features Chuck Norris/Steven Sigal/Jean Claude van Damme/Dolf Lundgren but once in a while I like to watch a movie that allows me turn my brain off and just enjoy the action, explosions and special effects. Movie Starship troopers has all that but it also has atmosphere that is required in order swallow it all. After seeing the movie I decided to read the book so for me it's definitely a good movie though it actually has very little to do with original book.

I prefer to watch the movie before reading the book because I agree with most people here about book usually being much better. If I first read the book I'd be very disappointed with the movie, but by watching the movie first I get to enjoy it too and then enjoy the book even more thus getting the enjoyment twice out of one story. I don't have the problem, that several people mentioned, with imagining characters in the book differently after seeing the movie.

One important problem with movies is that very few movies can hold the attention of the casual viewers for more then 2 hours and that's usually not nearly enough to convey all the complexity and depth of the book (everything that makes the book good in the first place).

Finally I wasn't going to bring up Lord of the rings but somebody else mentioned it so I have to comment. First movie is great (not perfect, but great) adaptation of the book. Second movie has little more flaws, but is still very good. I enjoyed watching them both immensely AFTER reading the books, which as I said ealrlier is not my favorite pracitice. Some of the changes made in them even make the story better (Faramir is no longer poor man's Aragorn, but a human with flaws and virtues; Frodo's inner struggle to save Smeagol from Gollum and thus hope for himself is more pronounced; scene when Boromir and Faramir capture Osgiliath adds depth to their characters based on the book's appendixes though it's not actuality in the book etc.). But 3rd movie is so terrible, it's unwatchable after reading the book. It makes major changes in the plot and the characters and none of it is good. At times it's boring and at times it's extremely annoying. Frodo trusting Gollum over Sam, and bringing undead to battle of Pelennor fields negates the core of the book. Denethor looks younger then Boromir and is turned into a mindless pig in stead of powerful and cunning lord etc. I just have no words to describe how disappointed I was with it after loving first 2 movies

[joeblogg]

dude! think about harry potter. i love when they turn movies into books. most good movies are from books - lord of the rings, harry potter, the da vinci code. i mean great movies come from books. who likes harry potter and the da vinci code? who's a fan of lord of the rings?

[y4nzi]

I love the concept of turning movies into books although there is a big risk of disappointment if what you envisioned yourself isn't what ends up on screen. I guess thats the problem with many of the adaptations because everyone has their own different view, books leave the character/story/setting open to your own imagination whilst movies give less scope for that.
e.g. Narnia was one of my favourite books as a child and I was so excited about the movie, was slightly disappointed as was I with the Davinci Code, although on the other hand Lord of the Rings was an excellent adaptation of the triology

[networker]

It irritates me that many of these books have been
turned into movies.
The way I see it,one doesn't even know Lord of the rings
at all until one has read the trilogy.
I mean,I've read a clockwork orange and never have any desire
to see the movie.Reading a book is like having a private,custom movie.
Call me messed up or what, but the best entertainment is still in books.

[africa]

I hate it when they turn books into movies.
Most often they fail to interpret the story and it loses a lot the exciting stuff.

just reading and then watching Harry Potter will be such a bore because sometimes they leave out the most gripping of scenes.
One film i thought was well done was The Lord of the Ring trilogy.

All three were so well done and they never lost nothing. I think the director should take over Harry Potter, he know what he does.