View Full Version : Books to Film Blunders
troniscool
11-23-2006, 01:45 AM
With the exception of Jurassic Park no Crichton movies have lived up to the books. Congo is regarded as trash. I like it ok because of seeing it when I was small but it doesn't come close to being as good as the novel. Timeline is crap.
What really good books that you have read made for a really crappy movie??
xxxthundercatxxx
11-23-2006, 01:48 AM
"Everybody Poops" was an amazing book but the film was really crappy, but in all the wrong ways. Germans screw everything up.
satansmagichat
11-23-2006, 03:30 AM
I kind of like to think that the movies and the books are just different. Kind of like remakes of films, ya know? But to make sure I'm not disappointed, I try and watch the movie first. That's probably the opposite of what everyone else says, but the way I figure it the book will have more content than the movie. So I watch the movie, get the story, hopefully enjoy the movie, and then go to the book for a better understanding of the characters, events, concepts, etc. This practice has led me to enjoy the book AND movie versions of Fight Club and A Clockwork Orange, so I'm happy.
But movies that just totally jumped the shark? I'll get back to you on that.
spazkake
11-23-2006, 06:27 AM
edit: nevermind
vegasgeek
11-23-2006, 08:33 AM
I'm probably gonna get shot in the head for this. The novel adaptions of Star Wars Ep. I, II, III, have all been better then the actual films. Sure the movies kick some ass. But I get a better connection with the characters from the books then i do the movies. It's kinda the same thing since the books came out like a week or two before the movie.
satansmagichat
11-23-2006, 02:19 PM
I'm probably gonna get shot in the head for this. The novel adaptions of Star Wars Ep. I, II, III, have all been better then the actual films. Sure the movies kick some ass. But I get a better connection with the characters from the books then i do the movies. It's kinda the same thing since the books came out like a week or two before the movie.
No one's gonna shoot you in the head. They probably were better, seeing as how the movies sucked. I almost misread that the first time I saw it and thought you meant the original trilogy at first.
psbp516
11-23-2006, 02:24 PM
The main one is probably hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy. I can probably name dozens of others but that is the one that pissed me off the most. Damn hollywood!
sloppybunny
11-23-2006, 02:43 PM
The main one is probably hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy. I can probably name dozens of others but that is the one that pissed me off the most. Damn hollywood!
Wasn't it a full British production?
Haven't read the book, but I liked the film.
vegasgeek
11-23-2006, 06:53 PM
Wasn't it a full British production?
Haven't read the book, but I liked the film.
I believe it was the US who did it. Also, I believe they had a British TV show based on the novels. Did well from what I have seen/heard of.
toastmstrgeneral
11-23-2006, 11:45 PM
The main one is probably hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy. I can probably name dozens of others but that is the one that pissed me off the most. Damn hollywood!
Overall I liked the film, even though it had a completely different feel from the book. The only thing that really annoyed me with it, was them trying to turn it into a love story between arthur and trillian. That, and Zooey Deschanel's wooden acting wasn't that great either, not a good choice in casting.
guybers
11-24-2006, 01:44 AM
Overall I liked the film, even though it had a completely different feel from the book. The only thing that really annoyed me with it, was them trying to turn it into a love story between arthur and trillian. That, and Zooey Deschanel's wooden acting wasn't that great either, not a good choice in casting.
I totally agree about the casting, Zooey Deschanel and Mos Def were prooly cast despite my trying to enjoy their performances. However, I thought the book was very poorly repped by the movie overall.
But speaking of Crichton book to movie disasters, I would have to say that Timeline is by far the worst. That was maybe my favorite novel of the last few years, which was made into the absolute worst film of the last few years. If you throw in Sphere and Congo, I think it is clear that Crichton books overall are subject to mangled film adaptations with only a few as exceptional as the novels on which they were based (which I realize is a high standard)
troniscool
11-24-2006, 04:32 AM
I totally agree about the casting, Zooey Deschanel and Mos Def were prooly cast despite my trying to enjoy their performances. However, I thought the book was very poorly repped by the movie overall.
But speaking of Crichton book to movie disasters, I would have to say that Timeline is by far the worst. That was maybe my favorite novel of the last few years, which was made into the absolute worst film of the last few years. If you throw in Sphere and Congo, I think it is clear that Crichton books overall are subject to mangled film adaptations with only a few as exceptional as the novels on which they were based (which I realize is a high standard)
DUDE i KNOW. I loved Timline but the movie was so very very horrid.