Get it? I crack me up |
Sure, there have been bad adaptations but to me anyway, some successful movies come to mind: The Lord of the Rings trilogy, High Fidelity, The Silence of the Lambs. Sure things were left out and altered and added. But you know what? That's OK. Sometimes things work in a book that won't work on the screen. Sometimes the pacing that works in a book isn't going to work on film. Plus Hollywood does not seem to have a problem rehashing a story over and over (and over) again so if one adaptation doesn't work, I'm never surprised to hear another one is somewhere on the horizon.
So I just want to ask those that hate film adaptations of books if there's something specific you hate? I'm not knocking your opinion on it. I just want to understand. Are there general aspects of book films you don't like? Were you burned by an awful adaptation? Is all of the fans a book gets only after they've seen the movie? Please let me know! What is it about books on film that really grinds your gears?
Jenna · 726 weeks ago
What Red Read 121p · 726 weeks ago
petekarnas 39p · 726 weeks ago
What Red Read 121p · 726 weeks ago
I think you make a great point about movies that stray from the book so far that it's almost like an independent piece of work. It's easy to forget Jaws and The Godfather are actually books.
Biblibio · 726 weeks ago
What Red Read 121p · 726 weeks ago
Biblibio · 726 weeks ago
Ordinary novels that get the tap typically frustrate me because they haven't actually earned the popular adoration that should "justifiably lead" them to be made into movies. I've seen ARCs with boastful comments that the film rights have already been sold. The book-to-film adaptation has become almost another form of advertisement rather than a true desire to transform an excellent novel into an excellent film.
I'm not against adaptations as a whole. In general, I don't think I dislike adaptations more or less than most movies (but this may be because I don't actually like most movies I see...). Perhaps because I come with more expectations when I know the story (and know that it's already been successful in one form), I'll be more disappointed by a poor film but I think that on the whole adaptations are like any other movie. That's my problem. I feel like adaptations used to be as carefully constructed as the books themselves. Today, they feel sloppy and churned out just to cash in on the success of a particular bestseller.
Apologies for the ultra-long and all-over-the-place comment. A topic with a lot food-for-thought and too many opportunities for me to complain...
What Red Read 121p · 726 weeks ago
I think I'm understand the book-to-film dislike better when you say you're more disappointed in a bad book movie because you already know the book is successful so it's not the story's fault! And I totally get that remaking another Jane Austen book is not going to shine any new light, unless you do it in a totally different way. I wonder if you were to change the setting and time period what that would do for it?
Also as for all the ARCs who boast about film rights being sold, I wouldn't worry about those ever making it to the screen. The odds of a book, even a wildly successful one, actually being made into a movie are pretty slim so the ARCs, which don't already have the fan base that a popular book does, have even less of a chance of getting made.
curlygeek04 58p · 725 weeks ago
And don't get me started on movies that change key plot points, like sad endings to happy ones, just to please a general audience.
The other thing is that even when the movie maker LOVES the book, and honors the book in making the movie, it's almost impossible to make a movie that's better than the book, or that adds to the book in some way. Most of the time you get, at best, a movie that's nearly as good as the book. So what's the point?
It's great that movies help people discover books. But for those of us who really love to read, a movie doesn't add anything.
What Red Read 121p · 725 weeks ago
Ah see I haven't had an issue with having the actors replace my vision of what the characters look like, if I read the book first. If I saw the movie first, yes then I'll think of the characters as looking like the actors. If it bothered me more I'd make sure to only see a movie once I read the book. As it stands I go about 50/50.
Even if the movie isn't as good as what I thought of, I still love seeing the characters in a new medium and possibly with a whole new interpretation that I never thought of. Sure, most of the time I prefer the direction I created in my head but sometimes I'll see a scene and go "oh it could look like that? Well, that's much better than what I came up with."
I think it's unfair to say for those who really love to read the movie adds nothing. It kind of implies that those who do like the movies do not love reading as much. I see the movie experience and the reading experience as separate and I can love one and hate the other. Usually I prefer the book, but there have definitely been times when I prefer the movie (LotR).
ken · 725 weeks ago
Either way we can all agree "I'll wait for the movie to come out" was a great excuse to give our high school English teacher.
What Red Read 121p · 725 weeks ago