Goodreads Ireland discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
Inactive Discussions
>
Best and worst adaptions of books
Walter Mitty was terrible Paul wasn't it. And I'd agree on the book thief too.Sleepers and it were two more films that I thought weren't a patch on the books.
Having recently read and watched to kill a mockingbird, the film I thought was spot on. Really good.
North and South with Richard Armitage is really good as is the BBC version of Bleak House. Love the HP series but sort of see them as separate to the books because they changed so much. Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet is incredible too. I'm noticing I like adaptions that allow decent screen time to tell the story. BBC usually air period dramas over a number of weeks and KB's Hamlet is over 4 hours. I hate when they condense a book so much it loses all meaning. @ Paul I agree re the Book Thief, they left out Death!
The best adaption is easily The Devil Wears Prada. I've read the book and it isn't really that great. I have however watched the movie a great deal and have even gotten my male friends to watch it which took some effort I might add and they enjoyed it also.Special mention to the Bourne trilogy which is my favorite trilogy going. Lord of the Rings are great films even if I do think the books to be awful really. I love Pride and Prejudice and I agree that the BBC series was magnificent.
Poor adaptions...well, you can never really think of them but that's because they were poor and you want to forget them :)
There are two adaptions that I can think of where I prefer the movie ending to that of the book; Captain Corelli's Mandolin and Chatlotte Gray. Maybe that's just the romantic in me though :-)
Two best adaptions fron books for me both star Gregory Peck. Agree with Seraphina on To Kill a Mockingbird and the other is a scifi called Boys From Brazil by Ira Levin. Niall if the book is bad and the film good then its not a good adaption in my books. A goid adaption remains loyal to the original work as much as it can. so Devil Wears Prada probably doesnt fit the bill.
Also the Bourne films were an extremely lose adaption of the books veering in a completely different direction from the books after the first film. Good films yes, good adaptions no.
@ Emma the train scene at the end gets me everytime. Brilliantly done. Casting of the main characters was brilliant, Brendan Coyle was also great choice.
I quite liked the Lion the Witch and The Wardrobe as well. It captured a classic so well. With HP its not just the robes its a few other things. In film 4 Dumbledore keeps getting angry and shouting. Dumbledore never shouts in the books, he doesn't need to. And yes,the whole background of Snape was sorely missed.And the bit in book 6 when the Burrow is on fire??? More reason to re-read the books though. in saying all that I dont think books 1-3 could have been adapted better. So good
Heres an interesting twistvon adaptions. BBCs Neverwhere by Neil Gaiman and Lenny Henry came before the later more detailed book by Gaiman. essentially the book was an adaptation of the series.
I almost forgot about her! She was brilliant.
@ Emma the book must be really bad because I thought GWTW was an awful movie.
I liked the book About a Boy but thought the movie with Hugh Grant even better. The few changes that were made were improvements.
Some of the recent adaptations I've seen are: Cloud Atlas and Silver Linings Playbook. Both made significant changes but Cloud Atlas remained truer and, I feel, better for doing so. The biggest change with SLPb was the ending which was a major disappointment. It might still be worth a watch, though. Cloud Atlas is readily recommended.
The truest screen adaptation I've seen lately was Life of Pie. There was a minor change in the origin of Pi Patell's name, but that was to be expected, I think. If you liked the book you'll like the film, but you really should have seen it in 3D.
For tv, the BBC's 1980s adaptations of Sherlock are excellent.
The truest screen adaptation I've seen lately was Life of Pie. There was a minor change in the origin of Pi Patell's name, but that was to be expected, I think. If you liked the book you'll like the film, but you really should have seen it in 3D.
For tv, the BBC's 1980s adaptations of Sherlock are excellent.
I forgot about Life of Pi and Cloud Atlas, both of which I thought great adaptations.I loved the movie Silver Linings Playbook but had no idea that there was a book. Now I'll have to read the book to find out the real ending although I really did like the movie ending. I grew up in the area that Silver Linings took place. It was a wonderful walk down memory lane, not that I knew many psychos.
LMM ,Wizard of Oz is a great choice. Obviously they added song and dance routines but it really captured the story and the world so well.Sticking with musical versions its hard to leave out Oliver! and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Both are wonderful musicals that really captured the essence of the books (even if Fagan dances off in the end of the film)
Emma. If they had to reduce stuff from the books why did they add a scene in book 6 wuth The Burrow burning under attack from death eaters. that scene took over five minutes and the only point of it was to give Helena Bonham Carter screen time. It contradicted so much of the book stuff about magic and protection spells etc that it was just stupid. Chris Columbus wouldnt have done it if he had stayed on.
Sorry Emma my mistake, I meant Willy Wonka and the Chocolate factory which is the 1971 film with Gene Wilder . Still one of my favourites. I hated the update. The focus shifts too much from Charlie to Willy Wonka which is not the point of the book.
And agreed on the studios. Maybe these changes make sense for those who haven't read the books .
@Paul. surely you don't want to deprive Johnny Depp of more exposure just for the sake of adhering to the book.
I'd have no problem if he was his usual brilliant self but in this instance I don't think he was sadly. And the oompa loompas were a bit too sinister this time round.
I loved the Gene Wilder version of Willy Wonka and wasn't going to see the newer one but am glad I did. I would have missed Johnny Depp snapping his big white teeth together. That was great and I actually liked this version as well, evil oompas loompas and all.
The new version wasn't bad but I much preferred the Gene Wilder incarnation of Wonka I suppose. The teeth thing with his dad in the new one is quite funny though
Its a great book Jamie Lynn.Fantastic imagination and chocolate.
I really didn't think The Golden Compass did any kind of justice to the first of Philip Pullman's His Dark Materials trilogy. Maybe I'm not alone as I don't think they've continued with it?Mind, as the books went on, I became more and more disenchanted, as it seemed Mr Pullman had an agenda which detracted from the story.
Diane wrote: "I loved the Gene Wilder version of Willy Wonka and wasn't going to see the newer one but am glad I did. I would have missed Johnny Depp snapping his big white teeth together. That was great and I a..."I preferred the Gene Wilder version. He made Willie Wonka lovable. Johnny Depp made him seem like a pervy weirdo! Just my opinion - I know a lot won't agree with it.
I agree with you. Depp made Wonka creepy instead of eccentric and it didnt work.
Jamie, the character of Holmes played by.Cumberpatch is still closer to the books than many of the adaptions that polish him up too much.
I enjoyed depps version of willy wonka. When I watched the gene wilder version as a child he scared me and so did the oompa loompa's so I think depp did a good version of frightening the living daylights out of today's children ;)
Or when the oompa loompa's roll the blueberry girl down to juicer....that film was pretty weird
@Isabella. There's far to much going on in Pullman's His Dark Materials to put into movie-sized issues. If it's going to be made each book into at least six hours of screen time, I feel. If it's going to work we need a real feel for the Magestirium, the Gyptian and Witch cultures and Lyra's Oxford. You can't cram that into two hours.
Re. Wonka: Gene Wilder every time. :)
Never heard of it, Jamielynn. I'll have to check it out.
Here's a list of great adaptations I posted in another thread a while ago:Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory
Silence of the Lambs
No Country for Old Men
Bladerunner
Jackie Brown
Jaws
Fight Club
One Flew over the Cuckoos nest
Trainspotting
The Exorcist
Stephen King has a lot of books that didn't translate well, but the ones that did were fantastic:
The Shining
Shawshank Redemption
Carrie
Misery
Stand by me
Amusingly - one of the best adaptations:Stanley Kubrick's The Shining (One of the best movies ever made)
One of the worst adaptations:
Stephen King's The Shining :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIgpt...
King is a master of words, but certainly no master of the visual medium.
The first of the worst to come to mind is Permanent Midnight. Which is an amazing autobiography from a guy called Gerry Stahl. Who was a writer for big TV shows in the 80s like ALF. But he was raging drug addict. It's all very dark and gritty, but darkly comic just barely balancing both of his worlds.And who do they cast in the movie? BEN STILLER. Nuff said.
Yeah, I like most of the King adaptations. The only bad one I ever saw was the Langoliers, which was pretty rubbish. I never read the book to make a comparison, though.
I like Stiller's movies but I don't think he has the acting chops for serious drama. Even if he did he might be hard to take seriously. I'd never heard of the book or film, I have to admit.
I like Stiller's movies but I don't think he has the acting chops for serious drama. Even if he did he might be hard to take seriously. I'd never heard of the book or film, I have to admit.
The world according to Garp, brilliant book brilliant film.Blot on the landscape, the BBC did a brilliant adaptation.
And Chocolat.
Declan wrote: "The only bad one I ever saw was the Langoliers, which was pretty rubbish"I read it and saw it, and yep that's a very typical example of one of his bad adaptations.
I always reference The Langoliers whenever something goes missing despite the fact that no one ever has a clue what I'm talking about.
The Shining was awful in both versions.WHAT!?
Wow.
Kubrick's Shining is one of the best movies ever made. Note I'm not saying one of the scariest horrors ever made, but one of the best movies ever made. Gets better with every watch.
Jamie Lynn wrote: "I'm glad you liked them John. I guess it's all in how you see it. Shelly Duval and Jack Nickelson were hard for me to take seriously. He's usually very good."I'm in complete awe of Kubricks work on that film more than the actors performances. Well, Nicholson completely nails it but that's besides the point. Every single frame and every sound in that movie is so well crafted by Kubrick. Such a masterpiece.
I think the 2nd version was better than the first.
You have got to be trolling. I think I might stop feeding the troll.
Someone posted a link to an interview when Doctor Sleep was released and King said that Duvall's portrayal was very misogynistic. I don't quite understand how one character can represent an entire sex, but anyway, King was sure he'd written a stronger character in any case.
Jamie Lynn wrote: "It's ok to agree to disagree John. :)"On a lot of things sure, other opinions are available.
On whether Stephen King is a better movie maker than Stanley Kubrick? No that's just not open for debate :)
The only Kubrick film I actually like is full metal jacket. All his other films are a bit too wacky for me. Eyes wide shut was absolute rubbish.
My favourite king book turned to film is shawshank redemption, followed by the green mile and then stand by me.
@ Seraphina I haven't seen Stand By Me but the other two are great.
Stand by Me is one if those great coming of age films. Well worth a look.
Eyes Wide Shut: The film that sex dull.
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
Goodreads Ireland
Books mentioned in this topic
Tell the Wolves I'm Home (other topics)The Fault in Our Stars (other topics)
Tell the Wolves I'm Home (other topics)
Eleanor & Park (other topics)
Permanent Midnight (other topics)
More...
Walter Mitty was also awful and completely missed the point if the whole thing.
I think Lord of the Rings was a huge undertaking done brilliantly,leaving some things out but capturing the books very well.
Frankly it amazes me that the same people have then screwed up doing the Hobbit. They minced some of my favourite scenes in all literature so badly it upset me.
Loved the Harry Potter adaptations in general but at what point did some idiot decide to dump the school robes for standard uniforms and take a bit of the magic out of them. some silly decisions like that along the way but still love them.