Books --> Films

[Claire]

What's the relationship between books and films for you?

If you've read a book, does it make you more or less likely to want to watch a film made out of it? And what about if you saw the film first - do you rush out and get the book?

Probably one of the first films I ever saw at the cinema was "Bedknobs and Broomsticks" - and I loved it. When I got home and rushed to the library for the book - I was devastated that the book didn't have the bit where all the clothes on the washing line come alive in it. I felt utterly cheated :mad: (Aaahhhh, bless!! :rolleyes: )

Anyone got any spectacularly good or bad examples of books adapted to film? Ones that you've loved or hated?

I can't bear to go and see the film version of Little Women - it would just be TOO awful if all the characters were "wrong" - not the same as they are in my head (and that's almost bound to be the case, isn't it) - I lived with the characters in my head for too long to suddenly get them pushed out by interlopers!

[Rootytootytoo]

In advance I would like to say that I hate the adaptation of 'His Dark Materials'.... or I'm sure I will do when it is finally made!

I know this may seem a little premature, but I think this is a good example of what can go wrong from the start. The huge investment of production companies leads to a reluctance to take any risks that might upset elements of the market.... whereas for authors surely they can follow their imagination wherever it might lead them.

I hear they have decided to remove the religious content from the film. I can't help thinking its ruining one of the crucial elements of the book.

Actually, that all sounds a bit more caustic than I intended, but it gets my goat!

[Jassie]

:cool: I try to keep the two mediums seperate if I can. Sometimes I like the films that have been adapted from books, other times I think they would have been better coming up with an original idea rather than disfiguring a literary one. Commonsense tells me that there is no way you can cram a whole book into two or three hours of film but you do want them to keep the essence and create something interesting with it so that it complements the book. Money grabbing Hollywood film execs don't seem to get this very often, obviously it isn't in the ABC guide to making money in films.

Bad - Bram Stoker's Dracula (Keanu and Winona, need I say more)
Bad - Frankenstein, has there ever been a good one?
Bad - Mansfield Park, the book is my least favourite Austen, but the film was dreadful

Good - Blade Runner from 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep' been a while since I watched or read either but I remember them both as positive experiences.

Good - Shawshank Redemption. Good book made into an excellent film

Good - Sense & Sensibility, clever film adaption of a wonderful book but Emma Thompson should not have played Eleanor.

Of course my mind goes totally blank when required to come up with lists

[Harriet]

If I'm reading a book that I'm finding quite hard, say, Pride and Prejudice, then I'll watch the film then I find it easier to understand. Sometimes.

In my opinion the Harry Potter films have completely destroyed the books. My hamster could act better than Daniel Radcliffe. But I think the Lord of the Rings films did the books justice.

[Starry]

I think film-makers are getting better at adapting books to film. I love the Harry Potter films as much as I love the books. I really enjoyed I Robot and thought it stayed true to the spirit of Isaac Asimov's short stories.

I agree it does seem difficult for film-makers to make decent adaptations of Jane Austen's books. I didn't like Mansfield Park either or Emma for that matter. I wonder what the new Pride and Prejudice film will be like?

As a general rule if I enjoy a film and I know it is based on a book I will want to find the book to read it. A case in point is "A Beautiful Mind" - loved the film, but I'm having a devil of a job getting into the book. I think I need about 7 days of total peace and quiet :rolleyes:

And I can think of some films that are better than the books... I enjoyed the film version of Charlotte Gray by Sebastian Faulkes, but wasn't all that impressed with the book. Breakfast at Tiffany's was made into a wonderful film by the inimitable Audrey Hepburn but is only a so-so book.

And finally, if there was ever a writer whose film adaptations do not do him justice, it is Stephen King. I will never forget the travesty that is IT, great book, dreadful film. Although having said that I thought Dreamcatcher was okay. :)

[Rootytootytoo]

To carry on moaning:

But what about when the casting is wildly different than the character in your mind's eye?

For example, I really resent the fact that when I read 'The Order of the Phoenix', 'my' Harry had been evicted by Daniel Radcliffe. He doesn't seem right for the part to me, but he's lodged in my brain now!

[My Friend Jack]

Interesting range of opinions!

I cannot think of a single example of my reading a book after watching the film. Loads of examples of doing it the other way around, though.

And yes, Starry, totally agree about Stephen King (as I've said on other threads). IT is one of the best books about childhood and growing up that I've ever read, but the film... well, to do justice to the book, it would have had to have been 24 hours rather than 3.

[Darkstar]

I think part of the problem is that because we all have different ideas of what the book should 'look like', it's impossible to produce a film that will delight everyone who's read the book. When you add into the equation the considerations of film company executives who just want to make a film that will appeal to the widest possible audience (ie mostly people who won't have read the book) it's even less possible.

Some books are simply too long to make into standard films, others just don't work. Having said that, I think adaptations are getting better. Look at some of the really old 'classic' ones from the 30s and 40s for example. My current favourite adaptation has to be Lord of the Rings which was stunning.

I can't actually think of an occasion where I've seen the movie first then read the book.

[Sara]

Usually if I've read a book I'll want to see the film, just to see an interpretation of the novel. It's often interesting to see how a directors interpretation compares with my own. I will go and see the His Dark Materials adap, even though I have a really bad feeling about it, for this reason.

[Opal]

In my opinion the Harry Potter films have completely destroyed the books. My hamster could act better than Daniel Radcliffe. But I think the Lord of the Rings films did the books justice.

I agree with you on both counts! The Harry Potter films are terrible compared to the books - too many details changed/left out!

And as for LotR.... I spent 12 hours straight in front of my tv on Friday watching the extended editions back to back.... And OMG! :eek: They're amazing! And the added bits definately improved it (not that I thought they could before I saw it!)

[Rootytootytoo]

Crikey, I did that last weekend. It left me feeling a bit weird and seeing dark portents in everyday household items... It was the most faithful adpatation of a novel I've ever seen though I suppose, thankfully without all the singing!

[Jassie]

;) My bottom's not brave enough to sit down for that long!

[Harriet]

And as for LotR.... I spent 12 hours straight in front of my tv on Friday watching the extended editions back to back.... And OMG! :eek: They're amazing! And the added bits definately improved it (not that I thought they could before I saw it!)

Woah. I can't even cope with a Star Wars trilogy marathon. I give up after Episode 5!

[My Friend Jack]

12 hours! I'm lucky if I can get to spend that long watching football on TV in an entire weekend!

[luvtink81]

Hi everyone *waves*. I am actually kind of anal about this topic. If there is a movie I really want to see, I try and hold off on seeing it until I read the book. I really love reading a book and then seeing the movie adaptation and comparing the two. Of course probably 98% of the time, the book is better, but I usually enjoy the movie as well. :)

[Slowreader]

Hi everyone *waves*. I am actually kind of anal about this topic. If there is a movie I really want to see, I try and hold off on seeing it until I read the book. I really love reading a book and then seeing the movie adaptation and comparing the two. Of course probably 98% of the time, the book is better, but I usually enjoy the movie as well. :)


hi there, and welcome :)

I've never seen a film and then read the book, but have seen films of books, and yes the book is usually better.... you direct and produce your own film when you read

I will make an exception for the Godfather; now that I've seen the trilogy several times and finally understood most aspects of the plot, I'm ready to read Puzo's book... that should anser the remaining questions

[happyfriday]

I used to often read the books and then watch the film, but then a few years back Robert Redford decided to ruin one of my most treasured books, Nicholas Evans 'The Horse Whisperer' i was about 15 when i read the book first, and i loved it so much that i went through it about 10 time that year, it was amazing and i still love it!! And then I heard the film was out and i was so, so, so excited, I knew and still know every detail of the book (now i knew they wouldn't be able to put everything in it) but they actually cut out the most important parts of the book, i was actually upset and angry :mad: why on earth make a film based on a book if your just going to destroy it like that?????? It still makes me angry now when i think of it, so since then if i have read the book i will not go see the film or vis versa, i just try to keep it all seperate!!!! I don't want to be that upset again!! :(

[Tess]

In advance I would like to say that I hate the adaptation of 'His Dark Materials'.... or I'm sure I will do when it is finally made!

I know this may seem a little premature, but I think this is a good example of what can go wrong from the start. The huge investment of production companies leads to a reluctance to take any risks that might upset elements of the market.... whereas for authors surely they can follow their imagination wherever it might lead them.

I hear they have decided to remove the religious content from the film. I can't help thinking its ruining one of the crucial elements of the book.

Actually, that all sounds a bit more caustic than I intended, but it gets my goat!

I am also very apprehensive about this film, removing the religious content is a crazy thing to do. I understand that there may be people who are offended by the anti-church messages but do the movie people not realise that the books are phenomally popular regardless of this theme, they must do as they are making the film! Therefore why change something that works, this film should be made for the fans, many of which are religious and non- and who appreciate the message of "making your own kingdom of Heaven" don't mess with the beauty of the book :mad:

[Sara]

I am also very apprehensive about this film, removing the religious content is a crazy thing to do. I understand that there may be people who are offended by the anti-church messages but do the movie people not realise that the books are phenomally popular regardless of this theme, they must do as they are making the film! Therefore why change something that works, this film should be made for the fans, many of which are religious and non- and who appreciate the message of "making your own kingdom of Heaven" don't mess with the beauty of the book :mad:

What I don't get about removing the anti-church message: those people who will find it offensive most likely will not go and see the film even without it. So what they are doing is alienating the people who are guarenteed to go and see the film, the fans.

It was also make The Amber Spyglass about half an hour long. :rolleyes:

Sorry, slightly off topic.

[tom.allison]

[QUOTE=Slowreader]

I've never seen a film and then read the book, but have seen films of books, and yes the book is usually better.... you direct and produce your own film when you read

correct!
I would suggest that most people (if not all) "cast" the main characters
and this can sometimes make them wary of watching the film (Dustin Hoffman
as "Babe" in Marathon Man?? No way! tall and gangly/awkward? Hoffman??
[it worked though-shows what I know!]
Reverse can happen as well ..particularly with TV series etc...who can read
Morse and not see John Thaw? or Rumpole/Leo McKern? or I suppose Vito Corleone/Brando?
Additional problems are that authors can convey thoughts/emotions etc but
this is difficult in movies, without the (cringe) voiceovers
Regarding the Dark Materials debate, I avoid both book and film, though I can't understand the rationale of adapting a novel and omitting the central theme...like the Godfather minus the Mafia??

[Bookworm348]

I once made the fatal mistake of watching the film before the book when I watched the film of The Handmaid's Tale as I knew I was going to be studying it. What a HUGE mistake. The film was OK ish but, although the book is still one of my favourites and definately a desert island book, it meant that the book wasn't nearly as fantastic as it should have been.
Since that awful experience I will always read the book before watching the film, unless it is a book that I don't want to read.
I am also very apprehensive about the His Dark Materials films. I have such vivid pictures in my head that although I would love to see them on film I would only want to if it was MY picture in the film. Also I will be really annoyed if they leave out parts, especially some of the most important parts. I think I'll just wait for someone else to see the film and let me know what it is like before I decide myself.

[megustaleer]

The more I like a book, the less likely i am to enjoy a film adaptation. Especially if it is a long-standing, repeatedly read favourite. The version that plays in my head is always different, and to me, better than the one on the screen.

Not that it matters, as I rarely watch films these days...can't sit still for 2hours, never mind 12!!

I have occasionally read the book after seeing the film, and always find that the book gives me greater insight into the protagonists' characters, motives etc.... even if parts of it are so unlike the film as to be virtually unrecognisable.

Now, 'the book of the film' is another matter. If I watch a film that is then followed by a book based on the screenplay (e.g. The Piano) the book is a disappointment. Not just in comparison to the film, but as a reading experience. Particularly if it is just a verbal reproduction of the visual form.

[ChrisG]

One of my biggest disappointments in a film was the Daniel Day-Lewis film of The Last of the Mohicans by James Fennimore Cooper. This has always been a favorite book and when they were making the movie I had high hopes that finally a version was going to be made that could be true to the book's (understandably for its time) veiled undercurrent of racial prejudice and would show the relationship between Cora and Uncas as Cooper intended it. But they rewrote the story to make Cora in love with Hawkeye! As a film, it was OK if you didn't know the book but for a fan of the book it was a terrible adaptation (if you can call a film which changes the main storyline an adaptation).

[megustaleer]

I'm struggling to remember a long forgotten TV series from back in the '50s. Called, as my fading memory recalls 'Hawkeye and the last of the Mohicans'. I should think that this was even further from the book than the film is. Anyone else old enough to remember this?

[ckqd]

i fell in love with Harry Potter book series, but when i watched the film. i wasn't really impressed. :rolleyes: After that, i'm rather cautious about films being made after books....

[belinda]

Think the best book to film adaptation is Winnie the Pooh - but that is very likely because the illustrations are so the same.

I have never seen a film of a book that comes anywhere near the book. Think the biggest disappointments for me were :

The Go Between - fabulous and wonderful book and the film was good but it wasn't the book
Captain Correllis Mandolin - the film was so shallow
Charlotte Grey - boring film and a great novel

Actually have just thought of a film that I found as good as the books and that was Master and Commander. Think this may be due to my lack of interest in details about rigging and number of sails.

On Pulman's Dark Materials didn't go and see it on stage and am not sure that I will go and see it. I think I will make a decision following the reviews. I absolutely agree that if you take the religion out the whole concept will be emasculated and one could easily end up with a cross between Home Alone and Walkabout.

[Starry]

Just wondered had anyone seen Philip Pullman's answer to his critics about removing religious content from the films. There is a long article on his website, but here is part of what he says:
There will be no betrayal of any kind. I would not have sold the rights to New Line if I thought they were incapable of making an honest film from the story I wrote. Every conversation I have had with them, every draft of every screenplay I have seen, reinforces my belief in the integrity and the good faith of the film-makers.

The full article can be read here:
Philip Pullman article (http://www.philip-pullman.com/pages/content/index.asp?PageID=102)

I'm fully prepared to believe him.

It seems that I am in a minority when I say I loved the Harry Potter books and films. The sheer depth that the books go into could not be replicated on the screen, but the scene where the moving staircase to Dumbledore's office is revealed in "Chamber of Secrets" was so much better in the film than how I imagined it in the book.

Because of the way I feel about the Harry Potter films, I'm really looking forward to the adaptation of His Dark Materials. I am sure it will be visually stunning and we already know that it is a fabulous story.

[Flingo]

Rescued Replies

Posts 28-30 lost

crispychez 23rd January 2006 03:57 PM
I can still enjoy films if I have read the book but my pet hate is when they change the ending e.g. captian corelli, girl with a pearl earring. Why do they feel the need to do this - if the story didn't stand on its own the book wouldn't be so popular and they wouldn't be making the film in the first place so don't change it.

I'm a bit wary about memoirs of a Geisha - it is one of my favourite books and allthough I really want to see the film I'm scared they have probably changed it.

MarkC 23rd January 2006 05:11 PM
I've watched films as a consequence of reading books and vice versa. Some make the transition well, some less so - looking at a couple that have already been discussed:

Blade runner is a favourite of mine, although the story is substatially changed from the book, which is best looked at as an inspiration for the film.

The version of Emma on film that gives me the most enjoyment is Clueless (gasp!) Alicia Silverstone captures the spirit of Emma Woodhouse better than either Gwyneth Paltrow or Kate Beckinsale, despite not playing a character of that name. Perhaps strangely I find minor changes to the narrative in more authentic adaptations irritate me more than something like Clueless which is very different.

One other that has not been mentioned is The Hotel New Hampsire, which I saw as a film many years ago, not realising it was taken from a novel. When I discovered this (last year!) I read the novel. The film stands up very well having read the book as it is largely faithful to it and none of the potentially controversial themes were lost in the translation to the screen. Having read the book I was suprised at the casting on Nastassja Kinski though as Susie the Bear is not supposed to be attractive.

So a book can inspire me to see a film and a film can inspire me to read a book. I do rather dread particular favourites becoming films, the recent P&P for example. I try to enjoy them for what they are rather than looking for a completely accurate film version. I don't always succeed though as my earlier comments about the various Emmas show!

Momo 23rd January 2006 05:42 PM
Originally Posted by MarkC
So a book can inspire me to see a film and a film can inspire me to read a book. I do rather dread particular favourites becoming films, the recent P&P for example. I try to enjoy them for what they are rather than looking for a completely accurate film version. I don't always succeed though as my earlier comments about the various Emmas show

That is so true. Sometimes it is annoying, another time you can just enjoy it. My favourite Emma adaptation is the BBC adaptation from 1972 with Doran Godwin although Mr. Knightley is a little too old for my liking (though not completely badly cast). As to P&P, when I went to see it in the cinema, there were a few people sitting next to, in front of or behind me who seemed to have never heard about the book before and they thoroughly enjoyed it. I'd like to think that at least one of them picked up the book afterwards and became an ardent Jane Austen fan.

Flingo 2nd February 2006 01:46 PM
I went to see Memoirs of a Geisha a couple of weeks ago, and was bery VERY glad to have read the book first. Although I read the book a few years ago nd could not remember too much of the detail, there were lots of things missed from the film that my vague memory of the bookmanaged to fill in. A very visually stunning and artistc film, but not as gritty as I felt the book had been.

If I think I want to read a book, I have to do so before seeing the film (or tv version). As a result I still have The Rotters Club unwatched on video over a year after it was screened (and we no longer have a video player in the lounge!)!

Momo 2nd February 2006 01:54 PM
Originally Posted by Flingo
If I think I want to read a book, I have to do so before seeing the film (or tv version).

True, I have been as disappointed when reading a book after having seen the adaptation as the other way round. Although sometimes it works very well either way, at other times it can be a bad choice.

supersexy007 18th February 2006 05:34 PM
I read Memoirs of a Geisha and loved it, but agree with a post further up (sorry, don't know how to quote - new!!) that the film wasn't as gritty as the book and the ending was disappointing too - different from the book! I went with a friend who hadn't read the book and she thought it was a "nice" film which to me proves that it hasn't really captured the essence of the book. To be honest, I always complain the films aren't as good, but I still feel compelled to go and see them!! Why????? Who knows!

David 18th February 2006 05:42 PM
Hi SS 007 - welcome on board! In order to quote, instead of hitting the 'Post Reply' button, press the 'Quote' button in the bottom right hand corner of the post you want to quote from. That then brings up a reply box with the text from that post - you can delete anything you don't want to quote (taking care NOT to delete the QUOTE, /QUOTE instructions or the square brackets around them).

Looking forward to reading more of your posts!

supersexy007 19th February 2006 10:10 AM
Originally Posted by David
In order to quote, instead of hitting the 'Post Reply' button, press the 'Quote' button in the bottom right hand corner of the post you want to quote from. That then brings up a reply box with the text from that post - you can delete anything you don't want to quote (taking care NOT to delete the QUOTE, /QUOTE instructions or the square brackets around them).
Thanks David - I'll see if this works........

lucyb 19th February 2006 11:10 AM
Best adaptation - can we count the made for tv Miss Marples?

Worst adaptation - The film version of Pride & Prejudice/ The best bit about it was the half price offer on Haagen Daz ice cream in the vestibule. (Cue David defending Ms Knightly... :D ) It wasn't that the actors were bad as such (excluding Donald Sutherland - can the man not just speak up - some of us are getting hard of hearing in our old age) it just felt like they hadn't actually read the book.

megustaleer 19th February 2006 01:36 PM
Originally Posted by lucyb
Best adaptation - can we count the made for tv Miss Marples?

Only if you mean the Joan Hickson version !

Worst adaptation -
The current 'Marple' with Geraldine McEwan and a host of well known actors. Especially tonight's episode when 'Marple' is shoe-horned into a plot where she doesn't even belong!

Mungus 19th February 2006 03:29 PM
Originally Posted by megustaleer
The current 'Marple' with Geraldine McEwan
I find Geraldine McEwan very smug in this role. And she reminds me of a tortoise, which puts me off a bit! I started watching last week's but went to bed before the end. Won't bother with tonight's.

David 19th February 2006 06:17 PM
Originally Posted by lucyb
(Cue David defending Ms Knightly...
Here I am, right on cue! Not that any adverse comments about Keira the Divine need my intervention since they would be so patently nonsensical. ;)

Actually I'm more concerned by your dissing of Mr Sutherland, who was great as Mr B! If there's one thing that can be said about modern cinema, it's that you don't tend to have a problem hearing things (unless you've been so much it's actually damaged your middle ear).

I wouldn't have touted P&P as the greatest adaptation ever, but it's very far from being the worst. I shall definitely be buying the DVD and doubtless wearing out the pause function as I drool over K the D.

Marple, though, DIRE. Tonight's isn't even a Miss Marple story; they've thrown her into a Tommy and Tuppence tale, God help her. Still, she's had little enough to do in her own stories so far in this series so perhaps she'll find more diversion in someone else's!

Momo 19th February 2006 08:50 PM
Originally Posted by David
I wouldn't have touted P&P as the greatest adaptation ever, but it's very far from being the worst. I shall definitely be buying the DVD and doubtless wearing out the pause function as I drool over K the D.
Same here. And - uhm - I have already bought and watched the DVD. I like the fact that it's not as long as the previous good ones and therefore I am willing to have some things cut out. I have mentioned it elsewhere, I think this adaptation shows the Bennet's situation much much better than the previous ones. They were all shown too "rich" to my liking. Anyway, there are pros and cons to all the adaptations, surely nothing is as good as the original novel.

David 19th February 2006 08:58 PM
Originally Posted by Momo
Same here.

You'll be drooling over Keira the Divine?! :eek:

Momo 19th February 2006 09:00 PM

Originally Posted by David
You'll be drooling over Keira the Divine?!

:lmao: I wouldn't have touted P&P as the greatest adaptation ever, but it's very far from being the worst. I shall definitely be buying the DVD
Although I like Keira as an actress, she's not really my type. But I guess that belongs to another thread.

[FirelightSpirit]

Movies from books have been very hit and miss for me in the past. I often have quibbles with the way certain scenes are done (eg. Sirius in Goblet of Fire - very disappointing) and that can spoil my enjoyment of a film.

The jury will remain out regarding the films of His Dark Materials until my sisters and I go to see the first one, which will always be Northern Lights to me and not The Golden Compass (I hate when filmmakers change names like that - grr). Sister number one is re-reading them all, having bought her own copies last week(!) and I'm sure sister number two will re-read them before the first film too (provided she gets finished with Gone With the Wind some time this decade!)

I quite like the Harry Potter films, apart from GoF being disappointing (but they were never going to be able to put all of the detail of the book on screen anyway). I also (probably controversially) like Daniel Radcliffe's Harry. Someone once described him as having a very old soul and I think that fits very well with Harry. Daniel does seem to be impressing people with his acting these days and I think a real test for him will be if he can pull off the nobility and maturity that Harry has in Half-Blood Prince. I await the movie with baited breath as HBP, and Prisoner of Azkaban, are my favourite Potters.

There have been some very good films made from Stephen King stories (Stand By Me, The Shawshank Redemption - fantastic - and The Green Mile). Also Brokeback Mountain is an excellent interpretation of Annie Proulx's story.

I have to mention Lord of the Rings, but the extended versions are best, particularly Return of the King. Fantastic adaptations and a real labour of love for Jackson et al. If you're going to do something like this you have to love your source material to be able to do it justice.

I too disliked the movie version of Pride and Prejudice, mainly because of (apologies to David in advance) Keira Knightley. I simply can't stand her. I did like Donald Sutherland though.

I am a very big fan of a nice romantic comedy and I realise that many of them are adapted from books that I would never read. I just prefer to get my romance fix from a two-hour film than spend three days reading a mediocre book.

Ooh, very long post. I'm done now!

[dumpling]

I normally stay away from films based on books I've read because I nearly always come home feeling disappointed. But just this week I went with my Book Club to see Notes on a Scandal, and I thought the adaptation was really good. It managed to capture the "feel" of the book, which is a difficult thing to do.

[woofwoof]

One of the nice things about people recovering old threads from the cache is that it brings them back to life again for further discussion/contributions.

I think that the BBC adaptations have always been excellent - in most cases far better than the equivalent in film - the main reason of course being that the BBC screenwriters normally stick to the story. I particularly hate it when the adaptation more or less follows the plot, but changes the dialogue to make it more up to date. Unfortunately this was true of the recent Jane Eyre - the BBC's previous efforts (Michael Jayston in the 1970s and Timothy Dalton in the 80s were much better). Emma Thompson's Sense & Sensibility was a good film in its own right but there was too many invented scenes and non-Austen dialogue. Also, Hugh Grant didn't suit the role of Edward Ferrars, at all. The BBC's adaptation in the early 1980s was magnificent. Similarly I agree with what someone else said - the early 1970s BBC Emma was the definitive Emma. Does anyone remember the scene where Emma is meeting the vicar's wife and she talks about "Knightley being quite the gentleman". You can just see the steely, coldness in Emma's eyes! Paltrow was OK but it seemed to be more a series of pretty scenes. Like other people here, I didn't like the recent Pride & Prejudice - Keira Knightley just isn't Elizabeth Bennett. Some film adaptations, of course have been outstanding - LOTR, obviously, the Harry Potters, as well. I wonder if one's enjoyment is affected by whether you read the book or watch the film first? For LOTR 1 & 2, I saw the film before reading the book and definitely enjoyed the films more than Pt 3 where I had by then read the book. With Harry Potter, most people must be watching the films, already having read the books. Knowing what's going to happen definitely ruins a film which might explain the poor reviews/showing at the award ceremonies. If the books had never been written, I am sure that people would be raving about the films. I think all the great Merchant Ivory productions of the late 1980s/1990s were brilliant - again because they stuck so closely to the story. Howards End and The Remains of the Day were both superb films. In fact, I watched ROTD again recently - every scene is so beautifully crafted. It is a masterpiece. Notwithstanding what I said about the desirability of films sticking closely to the novel - I think maybe Dickens is an exception here. His plots often fall apart towards the end - I have to say that the simplified plot used in Oliver! is superior to Dickens's convoluted plot. Recently I rewatched the BBC's "Our Mutual Friend" and the superb production fell apart in the last episode because they kept to Dickens's ridiculous plot twist. I felt sorry for Steven Mackintosh having to play Mr Roguesmith behaving as he did towards Mr Wegg, so completely out of character. I liked the recent Bleak House, notwithstanding its excessive use of modern effects.

Just a final mention of the two great landmark adaptations of the 1960s, namely the Forsyte Saga (Eric Porter) and War and Peace (Anthony Hopkins). Both were excellent, though the former went on too long (I think the recent ITV effort was very good and was right to leave the story where it did) and the latter does look a bit low-budget, now. Talking about Tolstoy, the late 70s Anna Karenina was wonderful (Nicola Pagett).

Oh yes - my nomination for the masterpiece of masterpieces: the BBC's early 1980s adaptation of The Barchester Chronicles (Alan Rickman as Mr Slope, Geraldine McEwan as Mrs Proudie, Mr Bouquet as Dr Proudie, Nigel Hawthorne as Mr Grantley, Susan Hampshire, Donald Pleasance), now re-released on DVD.

Just to add one final point - films made from books may vary in quality, but films that get turned into books ("novelisation") are invariably terrible. "2001: A space odyssey" (I think I'm right that the film came first?) is OK, I suppose

[Flingo]

The jury will remain out regarding the films of His Dark Materials until my sisters and I go to see the first one, which will always be Northern Lights to me and not The Golden Compass (I hate when filmmakers change names like that - grr).
I'm afraid you can't blame the filmmakers for that one, FLS. Think Philosophers / Sorcerers Stone and you can blame the same people - apparently American audiences wouldn't know what the Northern Lights are (I'm not sure if that is due to intelligence - they may commonly be called the Aurora in the States - or just ignorance) so the book was published as The Golden Compass over there.

I normally stay away from films based on books I've read because I nearly always come home feeling disappointed. But just this week I went with my Book Club to see Notes on a Scandal, and I thought the adaptation was really good. It managed to capture the "feel" of the book, which is a difficult thing to do.
I think there was some more discussion about the film in it's book thread that you might like to join in with.

One of the nice things about people recovering old threads from the cache is that it brings them back to life again for further discussion/contributions.
I'm still on the hunt for page 4 of this one so if anyone can find it that would be good!

[dumpling]

I think there was some more discussion about the film in it's book thread that you might like to join in with.


Thanks, Flingo. I'll go and explore. :)

[FirelightSpirit]

I'm afraid you can't blame the filmmakers for that one, FLS. Think Philosophers / Sorcerers Stone and you can blame the same people - apparently American audiences wouldn't know what the Northern Lights are (I'm not sure if that is due to intelligence - they may commonly be called the Aurora in the States - or just ignorance) so the book was published as The Golden Compass over there.
Fair point Flingo. I blame the publishers' marketing departments then. Fair enough about the Aurora/Northern Lights references, but I always get really annoyed about the change from Philospher's Stone to Sorcerer's Stone because as far as I know, there's no such thing as a sorcerer's stone in alchemy, it's always referred to as the philosopher's stone.

I'm inclined to think it's ignorance, in the case of PS anyway. I read once that US audiences wouldn't get the concept so it was simplified for them - and consequently makes no sense. I have no tolerance for ignorance.

[Hazel]

I read once that US audiences wouldn't get the concept so it was simplified for them - and consequently makes no sense. I have no tolerance for ignorance.

Simon Pegg pointed out in a recent interview that no audience in America laughed at the 'Cornetto' joke in his film Shaun of the Dead, and when it was pointed out to them that it was a 'posh' ice cream, they still didn't laugh and they didn't see the amusement in eating ice cream first thing in the morning. Apparently it was the Brits' favourite joke. Not book related - but amusing nonetheless.

[FirelightSpirit]

There's a lot to be said for cultural differences. A lot of Americans don't get Irish humour and many of them aren't good with sarcasm either.

I find it amazing that for such a large country, with such a wide ethnic diversity, so many Americans are very insular, never looking beyond their own borders, and thus never understanding other peoples' cultures.

This isn't book-related either, but I always find it interesting.

[Minxminnie]

A bit off-topic too, but I met an American once who was far from home and despearate for some conversation in English. I was dispatched by my German friends to chat to her. After a long and torturous conversation, she asked me, slowly, "And what language do you speak in Scotland?"
She wouldn't stop talking once she realised this was actually my native tongue!

[Rachel111]

If I really love a book the worst thing is when the film turns out terrible. I also hate it when integral details are changed (actually if anything's changed). I also find if I watch a really bad film it puts me off reading the book.

-The Beach- Alex Garland
-War of the worlds - H.G Wells
-The Handmaids Tale - Margaret Atwood
-The Colour Purple- Alice Walker (I just hated it!)

and I'm still waiting for an amazing Dorian Gray to come out.

But, sometimes the films turn out amazing

-Clockwork Orange
-Shawshank redemption
-Wizard of Oz
-The African Queen
-To Kill A Mockingbird
-Gone With The Wind
-Twelve Angry Men
-Dr Strangelove

I am interested in how 'Lovely Bones' is going to turn out, I always thought it couldn't be put onto screen.

[Momo]

Maybe you still should try The Colour Purple, I think it's a great book. But, of course, it depends what kind of other books you like. From what I've seen from you so far, you might like it.

[Cassandra_Mortmain]

Some film versions are pretty good but I almost always prefer the book, it's all about the power of imagination I guess. Like with Harry Potter, the casting sometimes clashed with my vision of certain characters.

I loved the Ang Lee version of Sense and Sensibility but perhaps that is partly because i saw the film first. And in the film version of I Capture the Castle, I thought Romola Garai was really good as Cassandra.

I didn't mind the new version of Pride and Prejudice but I think the BBC series was far better. I'm not the biggest Keira Knightley fan so I didn't find her very endearing lol. And Keira Knightley's going to be Cecilia in Atonement isn't she? Hmm, not so sure about that lol.

I do think it's good to have so many adaptations of classic or contemp. novels: from having watched the film many people have the desire to read the book, so films do open up literature for a new audience.

[Momo]

My son watched Eragon. All of his friends who had read the book didn't like the movie and the only one who hadn't read the novel, liked the movie.

[Flingo]

Brace yourself, Momo! http://www.eunuch.org/vbulletin/images/smilies/joker.gif

The Time-Traveler's Wife is to be made into a film!

I really can't see how they will manage it, but hey-ho - could be interesting!

BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6567705.stm)

[Momo]

Brace yourself, Momo! http://www.eunuch.org/vbulletin/images/smilies/joker.gif

The Time-Traveler's Wife is to be made into a film!

I really can't see how they will manage it, but hey-ho - could be interesting!

BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6567705.stm)Yes, I already heard that while reading the book (or rather stumbling through it) but then it was put on hold because Brad Pitt had bought the rights with his former wife Rachel Green ... uhm Jennifer Anniston.
Anyway, don't like Rachel McAdams, can't see her in the role of a nice girl (which Clare really is). On the other hand, thinking about the scenes when Eric Bana will turn up in another lifetime ... :yumyum: :D
(And don't deny it, that's what you were thinking about when you said it could be interesting! I know you girls. ;))

[FirelightSpirit]

katrina will be pleased. Isn't this one of her favourites?

[Momo]

katrina will be pleased. Isn't this one of her favourites?Books or actors?http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/evilgrin/evilgrin0010.gif (http://www.mysmiley.net)http://www.thesmilies.com/smilies/innocent0009.gif (http://www.thesmilies.com)

[FirelightSpirit]

Books or actors?http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/evilgrin/evilgrin0010.gif (http://www.mysmiley.net)http://www.thesmilies.com/smilies/innocent0009.gif (http://www.thesmilies.com)
I was thinking books, but she might like the actor too...

What do you say katrina?

[Momo]

What do you say katrina?I think she prefers to remain silent. ;)

[Flingo]

Another adaptation I was reading about over the weekend is Sky's Colour of Magic. It will star David Jason (again!), this time in the role of Rincewind. Personally, I think his Only Fools and Horses chum, Nicholas Lyndhurst, is more physically matched with my vision of Rincewind, but nevermind if it lives up to Hogfather I'm sure it will be good.

[Momo]

I just saw a trailer for Atonement, and guess who plays the main role? I give you a hint, David might be able to answer that question. ;)

[David]

Hmmm. Momo's comment caused me to look for it, so here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATtSfe_DaJU) it is. Looks disconcertingly like style over substance from this, so I'm not ecstatic, Keira aside. Of course, trailers frequently have little to do with the final product, but this is genuinely one of my favourite books - a true modern classic - and I'm not sure it's going to be done proper justice.

Oh dear.

[Momo]

Hmmm. Momo's comment caused me to look for it ...So, men are curious, as well? ;)... but this is genuinely one of my favourite books ... Oh dear.What are you doing in such a case? Are you going to watch it just to see what they did to it or are you going to say, I'm sure I won't like it and therefore I am not going to see it. BTW, I didn't like the book very much, especially the beginning. I liked the last part, but if it hadn't been a book club read, I would have put it down after at least 50 pages. It seemed to me he was going on and on about the same thing for a hundred pages without really saying anything. And it wasn't getting interesting, just boring. Sorry. http://www.mysmiley.net/imgs/smile/scared/scared0016.gif (http://www.mysmiley.net)

[David]

I remembered you didn't like it, Momo - well, we all like different things, that's what provides interest within BGO. Yes, I will go to see it, but I'm girding myself for disappointment!

[Hazel]

I think the trailer looks good - it has certainly sparked my interest. Admittedly, that had a lot to do with James McAvoy, but not having read the book, I will start it today I think. It has been on my TBR pile since it came out! Keira I see, hasn't lost her pouty acting skills.

[Momo]

I think the trailer looks good.The trailer looked good to me, too. They seemed to show in a few seconds where the author needed a hundred pages. ;) The question is, does that still have anything to do with the original?

[Madak Hill]

I can't decide whether Atonement looks beautifully faithful or horribly torturous! I found the book a difficult (and slow) read; the themes more than the language. However James McAvoy as Robbie should be worth a watch. ;)

Not strictly a book to film adaptation, but has the 'Bronte' film been discussed? Michelle Williams, the American actress, has been cast as Charlotte. I'm very interested to see this but I have doubts as to how successful it's going to be.

[Momo]

However James McAvoy as Robbie should be worth a watch. ;) You have definitely come to the right place here, Madak Hill. :D

[Hazel]

James McAvoy as Steve in Shameless Series 1, still makes my heart pump. I will now pretty much watch him in anything. I wish I was a more discerning fan.

[Minxminnie]

James McAvoy as Steve in Shameless Series 1, still makes my heart pump. I will now pretty much watch him in anything. I wish I was a more discerning fan.

Did you see him in Early Doors? (The Royle family follow up, series 1)

[Hazel]

Did you see him in Early Doors? (The Royle family follow up, series 1)

Blimey, no, didn't know he was in that - never watched it. Hmmm, will be looking out for repeats of that now.

[brightphoebus]

He was terrific in "The Last King Of Scotland" too. I'm another raving fan :wavey:

[Minxminnie]

Blimey, no, didn't know he was in that - never watched it. Hmmm, will be looking out for repeats of that now.

I've never seen repeats, but it is available in all good DVD shops!

[lipstick_librarian]

Early Doors was probably my favourite TV prog of the last decade! I'm sure you'll love it - loads of familiar faces, and Mr McEvoy is just divine...

[Momo]

He was terrific in "The Last King Of Scotland" too. I'm another raving fan :wavey:I saw him first in Wimbledon where he portrayed the stupid brother of Paul Bettany. They made quite a couple and I like them both.

[Hazel]

Early Doors S1,2 added to wishlist. Wimbledon I may hold off on as not my kind of film...then again, I do love a bit of James. Will add to rental list.

[Momo]

Early Doors S1,2 added to wishlist. Wimbledon I may hold off on as not my kind of film...then again, I do love a bit of James. Will add to rental list.It's just a funny little movie, nothing special, really.

[Radders]

Early Doors was probably my favourite TV prog of the last decade! I'm sure you'll love it - loads of familiar faces, and Mr McEvoy is just divine...
Hear hear! In both respects! :love:

[fireball]

http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/8683/hisdarkmaterialsbb5.jpg

The above picture has three of the entire His Dark Materials in it which I have the book, and has something this thread is all about.

The first story is called Northern Lights, or as it's known in the US (The Golden Compass), the :mad:dening thing about the film version Northern
Lights (The Golden Compass) is myriad, but never more so than the 'ending' bit.

I wont say (incase those of you have 1) not read the book/s, 2) or not seen the film) but the ending bit of "part one" of said film never happend in the book not one bit of it.! Why the hell make an adaptation and at least make sense of it, but not the horse poo that it was made into.!?

I find that adapations of books into films, take the barest bit of the plot (if even that!) and put their own spin on it, look no futher then "I am Legend" they even changed the ethnicity of Neville for God's sake.! WHY?! P/C really gone mad eh.?!

I've got to the stage, where I take with a pinch of salt ANY film based on a book, because 99.99 % WILL be dire and utter http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y14/steelclaw32/PissedoffDog.jpg quite ! LOL.

[David]

Fireball, I have moved your post to this thread about general film adaptations of books since the original thread you posted in was about crime/thriller adaptations.

[LauraLou]

Lord of the Rings made a brilliant adaption. Me and my dad are just making our way through the third extended film now. :D

I think the films made the characters more real, I know that might sound daft, but in the book they'll all serious and you don't connect with them as much. In the film they add a bit of humour and you feel for them and understand them more.

[Hazel]

Lord of the Rings made a brilliant adaption.
I think the films made the characters more real, I know that might sound daft, but in the book they'll all serious and you don't connect with them as much. In the film they add a bit of humour and you feel for them and understand them more.Plus the books are so god-awful that any film adaptations were bound to shine...woooo, light the touch paper and stand well back! ;)

[Calliope]

Plus the books are so god-awful that any film adaptations were bound to shine...woooo, light the touch paper and stand well back! ;) Actually, I'm with you, Hazel, except I didn't think the films were much more interesting than the books. We can be burnt at the stake together.

[Hazel]

We can be burnt at the stake together.It'd be worth the sacrifice.

[LauraLou]

The books are hard to get into, but you've got to admit, that man's got an imagination!

I was trying to explain to my music teacher the story of lotr (he said he fell asleep watching it) and that basically it boils down to they have to throw an evil magic ring into a volcano. I don't think it made it any easier for him lol. :rolleyes:

[SlowRain]

I usually prefer a well-written novel to a well-made movie, simply because there is so much more to a book. However, each has unique facets that can be enjoyed within their respective formats. I usually try to read the novel first as that is the original source material, but I'm also willing to sometimes watch the movie first if I'm not sure about the book.

A few good books that were made into good movies:

Snow Falling on Cedars by David Guterson
Ripley's Game by Patricia Highsmith
The Quiet American by Graham Greene
Cold Mountain by Charles Frazier
Presumed Innocent by Scott Turow
The Hunt for Red October by Tom Clancy
The Russia House and The Tailor of Panama by John le Carré


A few books that were made into better movies:

The Lord of the Rings trilogy by J.R.R. Tolkien
Mystic River by Dennis Lehane
The Bourne Identity by Robert Ludlum (both versions)
Rum Punch by Elmore Leonard (movie: Jackie Brown)

In the case of such movies as Snow Falling on Cedars, Presumed Innocent, Gorky Park by Martin Cruz Smith, and About a Boy by Nick Hornby, I saw and enjoyed the movie first, then discovered they were all good novels as well.

I usually prefer it when the movie stays faithful to the intent of the novel, even if the end result is quite different. Simon Birch is quite different from A Prayer for Owen Meany by John Irving, but it is still a good movie. But, that's also a case where I saw the movie first, so that may have helped give the movie a few extra points with me.

[Calliope]

I was trying to explain to my music teacher the story of lotr (he said he fell asleep watching it) and that basically it boils down to they have to throw an evil magic ring into a volcano. I don't think it made it any easier for him lol. :rolleyes: The books would be a lot more tolerable if Tolkein had your gift for succinctness, LauraLou :)

[Momo]

A few good books that were made into good movies:
...
Cold Mountain by Charles FrazierI agree with you there, I loved the book and also loved the movie but there were a lot of people who didn't like the movie. I think it's a very personal question how you imagined the people, circumstances etc. and whether the director chose something similar to your imagination or not.

[SlowRain]

...but there were a lot of people who didn't like the movie. I think it's a very personal question how you imagined the people, circumstances etc. and whether the director chose something similar to your imagination or not.
I don't think it's so much a matter of what the reader imagines as what the author intended. The movie of Cold Mountain was faithful to Frazier's intent, albeit a bit rushed; that's pretty much the best that any director can do.

R.I.P. Anthony Minghella

[Flingo]

R.I.P. Anthony Minghella
Anyone watch the No 1 Ladies Detective Agency on Sunday? I've not read the book, but thoroughly enjoyed this adaptation. If the 2nd book is anything to go by, I'd say it is a better film than the books!

[Radders]

Anyone watch the No 1 Ladies Detective Agency on Sunday? I've not read the book, but thoroughly enjoyed this adaptation. If the 2nd book is anything to go by, I'd say it is a better film than the books!I did -- it was fantastic. Wonderful Sunday evening viewing wasn't it?

The first book in the series is the only one I have read, not because I didn't enjoy it, just because I have never got around to reading any more. However I think Sunday's adaptation has prompted me to borrow the second book on my next library vist.

[RedFern]

It's something I've been pretty interested in lately, reading a book then watching it's movie adaptation. Outsiders so far has stayed the most true to the book. I'm pretty interested in seeing where they got with Memory Keeper's Daughter. It's one of my favorite books I've read lately so I've got high hopes for the movie. What are some of you lovely peoples' favorite book-movie pairs?

[David]

RedFern, I've merged your thread with the main book/film thread.

[MrMustard]

I like a lot of the Michael Crichton books that they turned into movies. Jurassic Park, Congo, I can't think of any others at this time, anyone else have any?

[Grammath]

Most of Crichton's literary output has been filmed, from "The Andromeda Strain" in the early 1970s onwards. They are highly variable, as are the man's novels, especially the more recent ones.

[David]

I like a lot of the Crichton films, though I haven't been tempted by them as books. I also like Jurassic Park, as well as Jurassic Park with robots: Westworld.

Congo, though, I thought was a stinker that almost went off the scale!

[tagesmann]

The Andromeda Strain was a good book and a good film.
Jurassic Park and The Lost World were both good books. While Jurassic Park the film left out a lot of the book it worked well. The Lost World was very different to the book.
I haven't read or seen Congo.
I enjoyed Westowrld the film but haven't read the book.
I've read Disclosure and thought it was quite good. I haven't seen the film.
Rising Sun worked quite well as an action film but the book is better.
I thought Sphere was an awful film. I haven't read the book.

[BlueSteel]

It's something I've been pretty interested in lately, reading a book then watching it's movie adaptation. Outsiders so far has stayed the most true to the book. I'm pretty interested in seeing where they got with Memory Keeper's Daughter. It's one of my favorite books I've read lately so I've got high hopes for the movie. What are some of you lovely peoples' favorite book-movie pairs?

redfern, the memory keeper's daughter is on tonight (saturday) actually. belive its on lifetime at 9...this book means a lot to me so i'm curious to see how it translates

[iff]

so far this year i've seen 3 films (usually i see 4 films a year), Grapes of wrath (bought the dvd after i finished the book), Juno (in the cinema) and Love in the Time Of Cholera (in the cinema.gabriel garcia marquez is the man. i read tjhe book 2 years ago)

so 67% of the films i've seen this year has been books i've read. personally i quite enjoyed both the book films and also juno

[libertina]

Hi everyone *waves*. I am actually kind of anal about this topic. If there is a movie I really want to see, I try and hold off on seeing it until I read the book. I really love reading a book and then seeing the movie adaptation and comparing the two. Of course probably 98% of the time, the book is better, but I usually enjoy the movie as well. :)

This is exactly how I feel!

[Cootisms]

I'm in the "read the book first 'cause it's better" clan, except I say in 99% of the cases the book is better than the film :D :p ! Actually, I can't think of one example of a film I liked more than/as much as the book version... Will wrack my brains & see if I can remember any! Memoirs of a Geisha was probably the most faithful book-to-film adaptation I've seen to date.

[GWA]

It seems that most good books can't be turned into great films because good books are usually too complex in their stories / locations / amount of characters.
Take 'Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy' for instance which is quite a detailed book in terms of information, but the film had to shed so much in order to get their story across in 90 minutes.
So it can work, but it often doesn't because lots into little doesn't fit.

GWA.

[chuntzy]

I've just re-read Saturday Night and Sunday Morning* after many decades and exceptionally for me preferred the film version. I'd forgotten how many street fights and brawls there were in the novel the descriptions of which bored me and so preferred the balance in the film of factory life, Arthur's love life and Nottingham by day and by night.

*going to a talk tonight by Alan Sillitoe as part of Sheffield's annual Off the Shelf book festival

[solace91z]

I enjoyed Fight Club both in print and on screen.

I thought the Constantine film however was a dreadful adaption of the comic series Hellblazer. Hollywood seemed to disagree though as a sequel is in the pipeline.

Who knows what will happen with Life of Pi...

[Grammath]

Take 'Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy' for instance which is quite a detailed book in terms of information, but the film had to shed so much in order to get their story across in 90 minutes.
So it can work, but it often doesn't because lots into little doesn't fit.

GWA.

GWA, I still think the best way to consume H2G2 is in its original radio series form. I have all five on CD and have just started re-listening from the beginning again as I do every couple of years. It is much longer since I read the books.

*going to a talk tonight by Alan Sillitoe as part of Sheffield's annual Off the Shelf book festival

Hope it was good, Claire. I saw him speak at Wordfest in Cambridge earlier in the year and very entertaining he was too, and not just on the subject of his own work.

[Flingo]

At my RL book club meeting tonight we had a big discussion about The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas. I felt that I expected more of the film, and there were a few changes that really spoiled it for me. Others felt that it did well to convey the atmosphere.

Any other opinions?

[chuntzy]

..............


Hope it was good, Claire. I saw him speak at Wordfest in Cambridge earlier in the year and very entertaining he was too, and not just on the subject of his own work.

I messaged about this and, yes, Gram, it was well worth going out on a very cold night to listen to him. I asked him if he ever got feedback from the workers at the Raleigh factory in Nottingham and indeed he did and they were appreciative of the fact that the sort of jobs they did were detailed in a best-selling novel.

[Momo]

Anyone watch the No 1 Ladies Detective Agency on Sunday? I've not read the book, but thoroughly enjoyed this adaptation. If the 2nd book is anything to go by, I'd say it is a better film than the books!Does that mean you read the second and didn't like it? I read all the books and quite liked them, though the first one is usually the best. Although, having said that, if people weren't interested in more stories about Mma Ramotswe, Alexander McCall Smith probably would have stopped writing about her. I love all her little stories and hope to be able to see the movie soon.