|
Despite The Princess Bride being one of my favorite movies, the book is still better One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest is better than the book American Psycho was borderline unreadable for me but the movie was what it was and did a better job Life of Pi was a wonderful novel and the movie was boring and forgettable The Last Man on Earth is a-ok with me as the official I Am Legend film. Still not better than the book but it's great nonetheless.
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 05:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 00:49 |
|
|
My usual response to these kinds of discussions is that film and literature are two fundamentally different mediums and it rarely makes sense to aim for total fidelity between adaptations. I’d prefer it if filmmakers had more flexibility to do what they wanted, to treat other works as a seed from which new things can grow, instead of trying to replicate the source material. Both Stephen King’s The Shining and Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining are excellent and deal with different themes. I find it hard to compare Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? to Blade Runner. That said, when it comes to personal enjoyment, most of my thoughts are similar to what’s been put here already. I preferred the film version of Jurassic Park to the book. The Godfather removes a lot of unnecessary detritus from the book (including the whack vagina subplot). My most unpopular opinion is probably that Tolkien is an extremely dull writer and the Lord of the Rings film trilogy is far easier to digest.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 15:08
|
|
|
muscles like this! posted:The other is Alan Moore's "From Hell" which was a meticulously researched comic about London around the Ripper killings while the movie is just a crappy whodunnit (the comic makes no secret that Gull is the killer the entire time.) One of the most bizarre changes in the movie is combining two real people (Fred Abberline and Robert Lees) into one character who is also addicted to opium. The funny thing about the movie is that in combining the characters they give Johnny Depp's Abberline the psychic powers of Robert Lees but the comic has Lees admitting that he's a fraud and does not actually have psychic visions. The movie also cuts out the most striking sequence of the comic when Gull is dying in a madhouse and he starts traveling through time, both forwards and backwards interacting with future serial killers. Meticulously researched apart from being based on an utterly discredited conspiracy theory about the Royal Family being involved in the Ripper murders.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 18:30
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:My most unpopular opinion is probably that Tolkien is an extremely dull writer and the Lord of the Rings film trilogy is far easier to digest. For me the first book and movie are a wash, I like the second movie more than the second book, and I like the third book more than the third movie (which I strongly dislike) I'm not rushing back to either any time soon but I guess I prefer the books?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 18:32
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Meticulously researched apart from being based on an utterly discredited conspiracy theory about the Royal Family being involved in the Ripper murders. Nobody's perfect.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 19:07
|
|
|
Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein are both better than Shelly's Frankenstein, but they're also really different. Shelly's Frankenstein is in a lot of ways a proto-android story whereas Whale's films are more deeply about alienation. They're also kind of weird because Frankenstein itself has little to do with the book beyond the core conceit whereas Bride actually does adapt a lot of the elements of the book like the blind man and the monster demanding a mate. I think Dracula on the other hand is more of wash. They're really too different to compare.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 19:08
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Meticulously researched apart from being based on an utterly discredited conspiracy theory about the Royal Family being involved in the Ripper murders. The afterword literally says he knows the theory is nonsense and that wasn’t the point
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 19:16
|
|
|
I think Ozymandias' scheme makes more sense in the Watchmen movie than in the comic.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 19:29
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Meticulously researched apart from being based on an utterly discredited conspiracy theory about the Royal Family being involved in the Ripper murders. Meticulously researched including that. Moore knows it's bullshit and says as much in the back matter, but went with the story regardless because it's just the most fun possibility for a work of fiction.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 19:41
|
|
|
Adlai Stevenson posted:For me the first book and movie are a wash, I like the second movie more than the second book, and I like the third book more than the third movie (which I strongly dislike) I admire Tolkien’s imagination and world-building. When it comes to prose, though, something about the way he writes just makes my eyes glaze over. There’s just so many songs, so many long winding sentences. Action takes forever because there’s all these insignificant details cluttered between them. Realize that some of the things that repel me draw others in. The series just isn’t for me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 20:13
|
|
|
LORD OF BOOTY posted:Meticulously researched including that. Moore knows it's bullshit and says as much in the back matter, but went with the story regardless because it's just the most fun possibility for a work of fiction. Yeah, Appendix II "The Dance of the Gull Catchers" is a history of Ripper theories and he goes into how dodgy the Royal Baby theory was and how it was mostly put forward by a guy who claimed to be a descendant of said baby. Also: 
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2019 20:33
|
|
|
General Dog posted:I think Ozymandias' scheme makes more sense in the Watchmen movie than in the comic. The Watchmen book is so much better than the movie. Stephen King's It is better as a book than either of the movies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2019 03:10
|
|
|
The forest Gump and Rodger rabbit books are both flat out awful
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2019 03:30
|
|
|
Davros1 posted:The Watchmen book is so much better than the movie. Eh, there's a huge conceit in the book in regards to the superhero, telepaths/people with esp are a known phenomenon and accepted in the scientific community, which kinda negates the uniqueness of Manhattan. How special is a man with superhuman abilities when normal humans are not only born with superhuman abilities, but that there's enough that exist to be used as cannon fodder for Ozymandius' plan? I liked how the movie streamlined that plot point and still made it work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2019 03:45
|
|
|
I think the movie choice falls apart a bit because Manhattan is a definitively American figure whereas the Vagina Squid has no Earthly roots. But it's really the execution around the scene that is lacking. In the book, there is this big moment before the monster hits where we actually see human decency and people trying to do right only to be obliterated for the greater good. Then there are just the pages of devastation that you just sit with for awhile. A movie adaptation doesn't have to literally adapt that image for image, but the film attack is just so sterile and emotionless.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2019 04:04
|
|
|
I think you're underestimating Dr. Manhattan powers. He is basically a god. It's pointless for humanity to come together to fight him, it makes no sense.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2019 04:08
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:But it's really the execution around the scene that is lacking. In the book, there is this big moment before the monster hits where we actually see human decency and people trying to do right only to be obliterated for the greater good. Then there are just the pages of devastation that you just sit with for awhile. A movie adaptation doesn't have to literally adapt that image for image, but the film attack is just so sterile and emotionless. And also they hosed up Ozymandias's line feeding into the attack seven ways to hell; "I triggered it 35 minutes ago," not "I did it 35 minutes ago", and delivered very tepidly by an actor who is not pulling his weight at all in that movie. Both the line and the attack are bizarrely weightless and impotent, for what's supposed to be one of the biggest emotional climaxes in any comic movie ever.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2019 08:42
|
|
|
Joe Chill posted:I think you're underestimating Dr. Manhattan powers. He is basically a god. It's pointless for humanity to come together to fight him, it makes no sense.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2019 15:07
|
|
|
ruddiger posted:Eh, there's a huge conceit in the book in regards to the superhero, telepaths/people with esp are a known phenomenon and accepted in the scientific community, which kinda negates the uniqueness of Manhattan. How special is a man with superhuman abilities when normal humans are not only born with superhuman abilities, but that there's enough that exist to be used as cannon fodder for Ozymandius' plan? The movie does the same thing however. Look at the opening fight. They're punching through marble pillars will no ill effects, and people treat it as normal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2019 15:23
|
|
|
Old Kentucky Shark posted:And also they hosed up Ozymandias's line feeding into the attack seven ways to hell; "I triggered it 35 minutes ago," not "I did it 35 minutes ago", and delivered very tepidly by an actor who is not pulling his weight at all in that movie. Both the line and the attack are bizarrely weightless and impotent, for what's supposed to be one of the biggest emotional climaxes in any comic movie ever. Not only that, but they completely remove the “nothing ever ends, Adrian” scene with Dr. Manhattan. Without that scene, Ozymandias’s plan is an unmitigated success and his methods are completely justified.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2019 16:26
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:I think Dracula on the other hand is more of wash. They're really too different to compare. I think the book is clearly better than the Universal film just because of how ahead of it's time it was. Narratively it's really genius in it's construction with the different first-hand accounts and it really feels like something that could've been written today. I'm actually not a huge fan of Universal Dracula. I like the Hammer version a lot more and I think even the Coppola film is a lot more fun to watch.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2019 16:32
|
|
|
My favourite book/movie comparison is Under the Skin, because they are completely different in every way except for the general idea (alien woman disguises herself as a human and abducts male hitchhikers) and I like them both for completely different reasons as a result. Annihilation is an interesting example because I thought it conveyed the weirdness and cosmic horror of the book fairly well despite veering off into a different direction since a literal adaptation would have been pretty difficult to depict without alienating even more of the audience than it already did. Arrival is based on a short story I loved and had an emotional reaction to and the movie left me cold. Somewhere during the translation they decided to Hollywood-ize the story, up the stakes, explain a few things that were previously left unexplained, and lost a lot of the intimacy as a result.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2019 16:43
|
|
|
Blue is the warmest color the movie is a lot better than the graphic novel and is so visually striking I think a graphic novel adaptation of the movie would also be better than the original book. The book trades in cheap melodrama that I didn't find particularly compelling and the characterization work by Adele exarchopolous and Lea Seydoux is way beyond the books depiction. The Meg book and movie are both trash but at least the book has a more suitably ridiculous conclusion. But the movie has Rain Wilson and those cool end credits so it's pretty much a wash.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2019 17:45
|
|
|
Davros1 posted:The movie does the same thing however. Look at the opening fight. They're punching through marble pillars will no ill effects, and people treat it as normal. Yeah the action is another problem. The fights and the violence in the book are supposed to be brutal and uncomfortable. In the movie it's just more 300-esqe normal speed the slow motion flashy stylish Hollywood violence.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2019 23:54
|
|
|
I don't think I could disagree more about Jurassic Park the movie being better than the book, as I have real problems with the characterization of John Hammond in the movie. The general thrust of the story in both versions is the same, corporate neglect and malfeasance result in a bunch of people dying. Hammond is a dangerous and irresponsible idiot in both versions, and effectively the main villain. In the book he's indifferent at best if not actively malicious which fits with the general plot. The movie version portrays him as a kindly grandpa for some reason. He's constantly ignoring expert's opinions and making decisions that result in people dying. He should end the movie in handcuffs, or at least destitute following the wrongful death lawsuits.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2019 03:45
|
|
|
Simplex posted:I don't think I could disagree more about Jurassic Park the movie being better than the book, as I have real problems with the characterization of John Hammond in the movie. The general thrust of the story in both versions is the same, corporate neglect and malfeasance result in a bunch of people dying. Hammond is a dangerous and irresponsible idiot in both versions, and effectively the main villain. gently caress the sequels
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2019 03:49
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:Both Stephen King’s The Shining and Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining are excellent and deal with different themes. SMG brought up an interesting concept that I've applied to The Shining. When it comes to moving a work from one medium to another, you have two ways of doing that: adaption or translation. Kubrick's version of the book was a terrible adaption because it omits a lot of the character work around Jack's alcoholism, and offers no semblance of redemption for him. However, it's a fantastic translation with Kubrick metabolizing the core of the novel to retell a story about an imploding family unit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2019 04:16
|
|
|
Simplex posted:In the book he's indifferent at best if not actively malicious which fits with the general plot. The movie version portrays him as a kindly grandpa for some reason. He's constantly ignoring expert's opinions and making decisions that result in people dying. He should end the movie in handcuffs, or at least destitute following the wrongful death lawsuits. I think it's pretty hard to make a theme park owner in media and not channel "it's walt disney".
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2019 12:40
|
|
|
Simplex posted:I don't think I could disagree more about Jurassic Park the movie being better than the book, as I have real problems with the characterization of John Hammond in the movie. The general thrust of the story in both versions is the same, corporate neglect and malfeasance result in a bunch of people dying. Hammond is a dangerous and irresponsible idiot in both versions, and effectively the main villain.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2019 15:15
|
|
|
Gennaro was a hero and the movie did him dirty. Other than that though, the movie is generally a more entertaining bit of product.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2019 15:21
|
|
|
Tart Kitty posted:SMG brought up an interesting concept that I've applied to The Shining. When it comes to moving a work from one medium to another, you have two ways of doing that: adaption or translation. Kubrick's version of the book was a terrible adaption because it omits a lot of the character work around Jack's alcoholism, and offers no semblance of redemption for him. However, it's a fantastic translation with Kubrick metabolizing the core of the novel to retell a story about an imploding family unit. I'd argue that there probably is a third level where the work isn't adapting or translating, but in a sort of conversation with the source material which can sometimes be a critiquing conversation. I think Starship Troopers is a strong example of that as is Scott Pilgrim.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2019 15:25
|
|
|
?? Movie Scott gets off way easier than Comic Scott Part of that is the movie covering a much shorter time frame (three-ish weeks compared to over a year in the comics) but movie Scott goes through a much more shallow process of self change compared to the comics Other characters with arcs get theirs almost entirely snipped, along with all the comparisons and contrasts with how everyone in the comic grows
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2019 15:46
|
|
|
David D. Davidson posted:Yeah the action is another problem. The fights and the violence in the book are supposed to be brutal and uncomfortable. In the movie it's just more 300-esqe normal speed the slow motion flashy stylish Hollywood violence. Did you take a bathroom break during the alley fight scene or something?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2019 16:58
|
|
|
Jenny Agutter posted:Did you take a bathroom break during the alley fight scene or something? The alley fight is a over the top spectacle that in no way feels real. poo poo, the rooftop boxing scene in Jason Takes Manhattan feels more real, and one of the participants is a zombie in a hockey mask who punches the other guy's head off.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2019 17:57
|
|
|
Tart Kitty posted:I really dig this thread and super appreciate the effort put into it, but I'm going to be a twat and not put that equal effort in. But I'm being supportive of the thread! What's the body count in Fight Club though? To the best of my knowledge, it's just Bob, who is shot by police. He also specifies that the buildings they're blowing up are all empty, because security and maintenance were all members of Project Mayhem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2019 18:00
|
|
|
Nail Rat posted:What's the body count in Fight Club though? To the best of my knowledge, it's just Bob, who is shot by police. He also specifies that the buildings they're blowing up are all empty, because security and maintenance were all members of Project Mayhem. Additionally iirc in the book there are explicitly a bunch of testicles sitting in Tyler's freezer whereas it's just threatened in the movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2019 18:08
|
|
|
Adlai Stevenson posted:?? Movie Scott gets off way easier than Comic Scott
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2019 18:39
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:Yeah, to be clear I find the book to be much more mature. I was citing as just having a different point of view and core message than the book, not that it's actually better. Ah, okay. Seeing it placed next to Starship Troopers really threw me, but that makes sense I still like the movie, but focusing on people trying to start a relationship is probably going to be less thematically deep by default compared to focusing on what it takes to sustain long-term relationships
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2019 20:17
|
|
|
Jenny Agutter posted:Did you take a bathroom break during the alley fight scene or something? I mean things like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZPnNJHaI5A&t=111s Really the fighting should have been less Matrix and more Oldboy is the point I was trying to make. EDIT: She's even wearing heels for Christ's sake. David D. Davidson fucked around with this message at 22:03 on Aug 14, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2019 21:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 00:49 |
|
|
remusclaw posted:Gennaro was a hero and the movie did him dirty. Other than that though, the movie is generally a more entertaining bit of product. Yeah, the movie was as much about bringing dinosaurs to life for the audience as anything, and that would've been rather soured if there was a big downer current of "everyone's just in it for the money, loving corporate assholes" cynicism running through everything. Besides, the Jurassic World movies, intentionally or not, got that aspect across pretty well at least. Nail Rat posted:What's the body count in Fight Club though? To the best of my knowledge, it's just Bob, who is shot by police. He also specifies that the buildings they're blowing up are all empty, because security and maintenance were all members of Project Mayhem. When the narrator is "chasing" Tyler through all those cities and running into different Fight Clubs he passes at least one other group doing the "his name was Robert Paulson" thing, indicating that more people are dying for the cause.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2019 21:26
|
|
