Most disappointing movie adaptation of a book

Quazzie

It was a novella circa 150 pages depending on what print it was.

Madou

'One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest' - didn't really do the book justice.

Also 'Less Than Zero', God-awful adaption, must rank among the worst.

Heard a film of 'The Time-Traveller's Wife' is coming out later this year too, will try to avoid, looks awful (Eric Bana).

Greyfox

Quazzie2002 wrote: »

The book was so good because most of it ( as is the case in a lot of Stephen Kings books) is a running dialogue of the main characters thoughts, many of which were never even broached by the film. The film also invented a character out of nowhere, so in terms of being a good movie adaption of a book it fails terribly. Many might enjoy the movie, but that does not mean that it was a true representation of the book.

FFS one of the main characters Red was named Red because of his hair colour that he had because he was from Irish decent. I'm not being racist but no one can claim that Morgan Freeman is from Irish descent. :mad:

Because of all these points I hate the film, and thats the summary of reasons why it should be added to that list.

I've Never heard such a load of crap in my whole life!!!!

I personally felt that everything that was good in the short story was in the film and the film added quite a lot of great things to the story! Not to mention the fact that Morgan Freeman and Tim Robbins both gave their career best performances! In place of the main characters running thoughts was Morgan Freeman's wonderful narration which is what makes a lot of people rate this as their no.1 film! I read the short story after seen the film and I was disappointed! Yes usually making a huge change to a character is a terrible thing to do but all is forgiven by how amazing Freeman is in the film!

Here's some things that were added to the film to make the story much better:

The film adds the great scene where the Warden hands the bible back to Andy saying "salvation lies within"....as it turned out in the end salvation certainly did lie within, also the how often do you look at a persons shoes!

What was added to Brooks been intutionalized was done brialliantly, a sad end to his character!

The playing of the piece of Mozart was a brilliant scene in the film, very moving and not in the short story!

What disappointed me most was in the film the moment when you realise what's behind the picture on the wall is very dramatic and an unforgettable film moment, this dramatic moment doesn't exist in the book, in the book it pretty much just announces that Andy has escaped!

The film was pretty loyal to the source material and all the changes just made it a far better story!

Quazzie

Greyfox wrote: »

...

We'll have to agree to disagree. I think my disagreement with you is that I read the book first and loved it and felt all those changes you mentioned were a bit too "Hollywood".

But we're both entitled to our opinions. Someone earlier mentioned they are going to read the novella after something I wrote, so for that alone I think it was worth it.

Shacklebolt

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Animal farm was such a good book - what did they do with the ending in the film?

The US government which provided funding for the film insisted on an upbeat ending in which a rebellion overthrows Napoleon. There's another later film which has a different but similiarily terrible upbeat ending.

Shacklebolt

Greyfox wrote: »

Anybody have the misfortune of trying to watch the Battlefield Earth film?

Funniest film of all time. Better than any comedy.

hyperali

Interview with the vampire by Anne Rice- it's just a horrible example of what HOllywood can do to a great book just to make money.
Constantine- watched the movie with Keanu Reeves and the character from the movie barely resembles the comic character. Visually or personality wise. The plot is so twisted aswell

sfmonet

The Other Boleyn Girl - the movie was just really badly done.

yerayeah

Boy in the Striped Pyjamas

Golden Compass

Rascaduanok

hyperali wrote: »

Interview with the vampire by Anne Rice- it's just a horrible example of what HOllywood can do to a great book just to make money.

Obviously they couldn’t make it as full as the book, but I thought it a really decent adaptation of the book. I admit I boasted a lot of scepticism when I heard about Tom Cruise’s rôle in the film, but he pulled it off perfectly, I thought!

Psychedelic

1984
East of Eden
The Grapes of Wrath
Brave New World

pauline fayne

The Secret Garden .

The Mad Hatter

hyperali wrote: »

Interview with the vampire by Anne Rice- it's just a horrible example of what HOllywood can do to a great book just to make money.

Um, the screenplay was written by Anne Rice, and she supported the film completely.

Frankly, I thought it was as faithful as a film could be to the spirit of the books (focussing on luscious visuals and details and the romantic side of the whole vampire mythos). They also attended to little details like the 'glass-like fingernails', 'marble skin' and 'eyes that seem to reflect too many colours' that Rice described in her books.

It was a lot better than the atrocious Queen of the glowy-eyed Damned at any rate.

Elliemental

The Golden Compass (based on Philip Pullman's Northern Lights), was truly abysmal. The chronology was all screwed up, and the ending was totally re-written to the extent that i can't see how they're going to continue from here.

Also, the Harry Potter adaptations have been pretty awful, leaving out most major sub-plots.

Greyfox

Elliemental wrote: »

Also, the Harry Potter adaptations have been pretty awful, leaving out most major sub-plots.

I think they done a superb job with the first 3 but theirs a lot that was left out of films 4 and 5...but then again you have to accept the fact that their was never going to be room to fit everything in

Overall the casting for almost all the characters has been spot-on

Elliemental

Greyfox wrote: »

Overall the casting for almost all the characters has been spot-on

In a way, this makes it worse. A golden opportunity, wasted. The actors are brilliant, but they've missed so much from the first three, that the finale will make no sense (Snape and the Marauders and where all that bad blood came from for example).

994

Denerick wrote: »

My big gripe with the film was the elves coming to help at Helms deep. It was just an un-necessary butchering of the plot. Return of the king generally was a disappointment, though the Fellowship was ok.

I think they wanted Arwen to do something because in the book she just sits on her ass until Aragorn becomes king.

turgon

No Im with Denerick here. One of the key ideas of the Lord of the Rings is that the elves dont care about middle earth anymore. Coming to Helms Depps was just a cop out.

It is the only thing I really didnt like in the LOTR, and I think it really deducts from it.

The Mad Hatter

I'm sick of this attitude that the best way to adapt a book to film is to facsimile the book. This doesn't work, it's pointlessly pedantic, and it makes bad films.

Funglegunk

Rascaduanok wrote: »

The only decent Stephen King adaptations I’ve seen are The Shining and The Shawshank Redemption.

I hear King hated the Kubrick version of The Shining. I have a feeling he might have a terrible taste in films, he loved Jumper ffs

InvisibleBadger

There is a trailer out for The Road on youtube. Looks worrying, but hopefully that's just the trailer trying to attract as many as possible. The director made the The Proposition, which was a really good film.

baileyjackson

here we go,

The Beach - Good Film but changed a lot. Should have used a more unknown actor than Leo, seeing as the book is considered fairly Indie.

Gorky Park - By far the one of the worst adaption ever. So much changed from the text. Totally Americanised and a total Disappointment.

The Shining - Just didnt like the whole vibe of the film, Book is a lot more haunting and really brings out the psychotic side of Jack. Without this its just another horror movie.

Boy in the Striped Pyjamas - Ending was the only cinematicly impressive part of the film. And don't get me started on those ponsey English accents!!

Series of Unfortunate Events - [OK I KNOW ITS A KIDS BOOK] Scenography was just amazing, but failed to be in any way exciting. I hate the idea of putting 3 books in 1 film. Should never have used Jude Law as narrator!

and finally.....

THE KITE RUNNER - Just dont watch it, read the book. So much better and emotional.

Denerick

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

I'm sick of this attitude that the best way to adapt a book to film is to facsimile the book. This doesn't work, it's pointlessly pedantic, and it makes bad films.

A film should catch the spirit of the book. Otherwise it shouldn't bother trying. When they destroy essential plot foundations for flashy Hollywood-esque reasons (Like the LOTR scene in Helms Deep mentioned) is when it gets sickening.

They can tinker away as much as they want, but leave the essential plot foundations alone. Otherwise call it something else. All it does is ruin the reputation of the book (Because 50% of people will only ever watch the film)

Rascaduanok

Denerick wrote: »

A film should catch the spirit of the book. Otherwise it shouldn't bother trying. When they destroy essential plot foundations for flashy Hollywood-esque reasons (Like the LOTR scene in Helms Deep mentioned) is when it gets sickening.

They can tinker away as much as they want, but leave the essential plot foundations alone. Otherwise call it something else. All it does is ruin the reputation of the book (Because 50% of people will only ever watch the film)

Exactly. For a good example of a non–facsimile version of a book, I think Apocalypse Now was a magnificent adaptation of Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness.

DTrotter

InvisibleBadger wrote: »

There is a trailer out for The Road on youtube. Looks worrying, but hopefully that's just the trailer trying to attract as many as possible. The director made the The Proposition, which was a really good film.

The disaster footage isn't in the film I think, but having Charlize theron play a bigger part is pointless. There were a couple early reviews I read, one was very critical saying not much happened. I'd say as a fan of the book that's a good thing as the harrowing stuff is spread out.

doonothing

The trailer for the Time Traveller's Wife is out, looks absolute ****e

Gaspode

doonothing wrote: »

The trailer for the Time Traveller's Wife is out, looks absolute ****e

Oh dear, and it was such an interesting book!

Sammy Jennings

Redford's Gatsby is a pile of ****.

Jay P

A Clockwork Orange. The book was amazing, one of my favourites of all time. But the film was fairly average, I didn't really enjoy it and didn't watch the last twenty minutes.

Boy in the Striped Pyjamas. I haven't seen it, but I don't see how they can capture Bruno's innocence since the book is seen from his point of view. So, for that reason, I don't want to see it.

cowlove

The Beach

Along Came a spider, really enjoyed the book but the film was so bad!!!

P.S. I love you lmao:D