Close to the book?....

[pyan]

Vladd and I were chatting, and this came up....

Is there any film adaptation of a book that you were completely happy with?
And if not, what came closest - or furthest?

[Connavar]

Shawshan Redemption is the only perfect book movie i have seen.


Quality wise and content wise there is so little difference beteween the two plus the great actors didnt hurt exactly.

I would give it 10/10 as how close it came to the original book story.


Next best is Godfather I,II- the story in the second movie isnt totaly the same but quality wise its as good as the book. How cant it not be Brando,Pacino,De Niro best character actors in movie history.

I give it 7/10 only cause the second movie has part they made up and wasnt as good as the rest of the two movies.

[The Ace]

Can't remember the author now, but a horror novel called, 'The Keep.'

It ran on the premise that the vampire legends of Eastern Europe had a basis in fact, an immortal monster who could take human form, cast no reflections and turned his victims (in this case a squad of Nazi soldiers) into zombies.

Although largely well-made, the film missed many of the more subtle moments (Like the jewish professor showing a crucifix to the monster who pretends to be terrified and provoking a crisis of faith.)

The big disappointment, though, was the ending, with the monster's nemesis, 'The red-haired Man,' finding love and redemption, a message giving as much hope for the future as the monster's destruction and the surviving nazis departing for Barbarossa.

The ending was changed (perhaps to leave room for a sequel ) in a way that left me profoundly unsatisfied.

[littlemissattitude]

Silence of the Lambs. I'd already read the book. The movie follows the book more faithfully than most adaptations. Yet, I was still on the edge of my seat all through the movie.

Gone With The Wind. The book is so long that of course the film had to leave a lot out. A lot. But you'd never notice when you are watching it, because it feels like it is all there. Amazing achievement.

[dwndrgn]

I can't recall one that I was completely happy with. Though the closest to pretty darned good would be Jurassic Park. The bits they changed weren't substantive (though the fact that they changed them to be politically correct was a tad irritating) and they hit all the high points and left out nothing of major importance. But I would say the furthest were the Bourne movies. All three adaptations of the first book totally missed the point of the book, the major suspense points, and the opening scenes and actual end. All completely off, not even close. It's been years since I've seen them or read the book and it still irks me. How do you do a 180 on the ending??? Sorry, I'll stop before I start ranting.

What I find interesting is that the Harry Potter movies have been not too bad for the most part though some big things were changed or left out that should have been worked in. Despite this I've enjoyed the heck out of every single one.

[unclejack]

Okay well yall are makin me remember my darker days but many of stephen king's movies follow his books pretty faithfully. Carrie is probably the most accurate in comparison to the book that I've ever read. Misery wasn't too far off either, minus the sledgehammer scene and the shotgun scene. Needful things...eh, they changed the ending and left alot out but the book was like 1000 pages so what do you expect? I've heard that the stand was pretty accurage, I never could get through the book though, too long. The dead zone is very accurate also. That's about all I can think of right now that are close to the books.

[ravenus]

I always maintain that a slavish adaptation of the literary source is not the best kind. I do like faithful ones but I've also enjoyed adaptations that moved away from the source and presented a refreshing new facet.

[murphy]

Originally Posted by The Ace

Can't remember the author now, but a horror novel called, 'The Keep.'

It ran on the premise that the vampire legends of Eastern Europe had a basis in fact, an immortal monster who could take human form, cast no reflections and turned his victims (in this case a squad of Nazi soldiers) into zombies.

Although largely well-made, the film missed many of the more subtle moments (Like the jewish professor showing a crucifix to the monster who pretends to be terrified and provoking a crisis of faith.)

The big disappointment, though, was the ending, with the monster's nemesis, 'The red-haired Man,' finding love and redemption, a message giving as much hope for the future as the monster's destruction and the surviving nazis departing for Barbarossa.

The ending was changed (perhaps to leave room for a sequel ) in a way that left me profoundly unsatisfied.

For those that are interested, the author was F. Paul Wilson.

[brsrkrkomdy]

What movies that are done well and close to the books? A Boy And His Dog by Harlan Ellison (yeah it's a novella but still counts as a book.) And Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury. (So they left out the mechanical dog, so what?)

And what movies didn't? The Keep by F. Paul Wilson. To be fair, the movie had a good going for it: the casting, the music, the photography, and some special effects. The bad part: frozen acting, crappy dialogue, some overblown effects, and you honestly think that muscle bound dude is fooling anybody into thinking he's a vampire? Puhleeze!!!
Damnation Alley by Roger Zelazny. The acting's so-so but the special effects are a real joke. The only thing the movie got going for it is that juggernaught with wheels. That's it. Nothing else. Did it follow the book? To some degree, yeah, but they left out Hell Tanner. This is the only character in the book that steals the show. What good is the movie without him?

[Culhwch]

Originally Posted by ravenus

I always maintain that a slavish adaptation of the literary source is not the best kind. I do like faithful ones but I've also enjoyed adaptations that moved away from the source and presented a refreshing new facet.

The Prestige is certainly one that would qualify as such. I've almost finished the book, and it's quite different to the film, but both have their own strengths.

[Connavar]

The problem when its very unsimiler to the book is Hollywood lack of creativity.

Usually when they make up a story of their in a movie version of a book its shallow. At least most of the ones i have seen.

[Overread]

Connavar sums up what generally happens when hollywood gets its grubby hands on a franchise - too much of what they produce is based on a formula and not on creativity - e.g. film must have comic releaf character who must appeal to 2 year old (looking at you JarJar).

That said it odd but LOTR really should not be in this list - so much is changed and cut - and yet it does so because it was made well and to a structured story.

If you want one book that has really bad luck with the film industry the look at Earthsea - sci fi channel casts a nearly all white cast and messes up the story - and Ghibli does similar - though without a totlly messed up story - but it is changed

[The Ace]

Originally Posted by murphy

For those that are interested, the author was F. Paul Wilson.

Thanks Murphy, I read the library book a long time ago.

[paranoid marvin]

If we're including animation and graphic novels , then When The Wind Blows is virtually identical to the book

As far as 'real' movies are concerned , the original Harry Potter film was just how imagined it after reading the novel. All the other imho have been terrible conversions , particularly the last 2. How on earth anyone who hasn't read the novels can understand what is going on is beyond me

[sanityassassin]

Originally Posted by unclejack

Okay well yall are makin me remember my darker days but many of stephen king's movies follow his books pretty faithfully. Carrie is probably the most accurate in comparison to the book that I've ever read. Misery wasn't too far off either, minus the sledgehammer scene and the shotgun scene. Needful things...eh, they changed the ending and left alot out but the book was like 1000 pages so what do you expect? I've heard that the stand was pretty accurage, I never could get through the book though, too long. The dead zone is very accurate also. That's about all I can think of right now that are close to the books.

A lot of Stephen Kings books and stories have been adapted some have been done well others are so far away from the story you wouldn't actually know it was the same story (the Running Man is a prime example)

The Omega Man had big differences from I am Legend. Apart from the Stephen King movies mentioned above along with the Green Mile I can't really think of any other good adaptations