PDA

View Full Version : Books turned into movies



Dragonite
08-15-2015, 09:08 PM
totally not borrowed from this thread (http://pokecheats.net/forum/showthread.php?22193-Books&p=474461&viewfull=1#post474461).

What do you think about them? Good, bad, somewhere in between? You look forward to when a book announces that there's going to be a movie made "based on it?"

marissachu
08-16-2015, 12:28 AM
I'm super conflicted on this. On one hand, I get super excited over the announcement of anything I've read getting a movie adaptation. It's cool news for the author, and an exciting prospect of getting to see something you're interested in come to life. However, I'm simultaneously gripped by the fear that they'll either a) CHANGE EVERYTHING b) leave out all the good stuff or c) just ruin it completely. There's just so many ways books turned movies can go wrong.

In the end I think the main problem is just that there's no way for a movie to encompass all of the detail and narrative that go into a book. They can do a good job adapting it, shaping it into something slightly different yet still good, but there's almost no way to keep the heart of the book intact. You can make tons of 3-movie books and still never get the whole of a story across.

Aaron
08-16-2015, 12:13 PM
I'm on the fence about this kind of thing. On the one hand, they can change far too much and it'll be not as good as it could be, like Harry Potter and Percy Jackson (definitely not the examples I stole from this thread (http://pokecheats.net/forum/showthread.php?22193-Books&p=474461&viewfull=1#post474461)). Or they could change a few things and it could be a good movie, like the Hunger Games. Ok, so the Harry Potter movies. I like them for what they are. However, I find it really irritating that they had to change so much from the books. It wouldn't be that hard to stick to the source material, and not change every other thing.

Kyoits
08-16-2015, 01:54 PM
The only good ones that I can think of are Harry Poter and Lord of the Rings. I enjoyed both of the series and I actually watched them both and was interested the whole time. This surprised me because I don't deal with long movies that well, but these were exceptions to that.

Dragonite
08-16-2015, 10:04 PM
I love how divided we are on Harry Potter. Imo Harry Potter did more removing things than changing things (and by that I mean Peeves), which is understandable because only a couple nuts like me would be able to enjoy a six hour movie. Supposedly Rowling herself had some level of veto power over the script, which I expect helped.

Blade Lord Nayru
08-16-2015, 10:15 PM
http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/inheritance/images/5/53/Eragon_Poster_6.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20061127224641
This is probably an extreme example of how an adaption can go wrong.


I did like what they did with the LotR movies, because the translation of the books is pretty terrible and mundane.
As a big Harry Potter fan I can say that some of the movies are good, but still a disgrace to the books.

SuperSceptile
08-16-2015, 10:23 PM
I hate them. The only good ones are Harry Potter and LotR. Whoever made the Percy Jackson movies should leave the film industry and never return, those movies are HORRENDOUS.

Starry
08-16-2015, 10:59 PM
I don't think I've actually seen too many adaptions, so I can't form an opinion on them, but, for the ones I have seen:

Harry Potter: I've only seen the first three movies, but I have read all the books, so while they do leave out a few pretty cool things that I wouldn't have left out, they're still pretty good. I hear the "Goblet of Fire" movie isn't that good, which is a shame since that was probably my favorite out of the series.

The Hunger Games: I loved both the books and the movies. They do a pretty good job of displaying the story, and the actors they pick are actually a lot like the ones that I think of when I read the books.

Percy Jackson: Ooh boy, this one's a doozy. I literally wrote an essay about these movies for a school project, where both my teacher and I agreed that these movies are terrible. They literally change so many things that it's hard to consider them the same story. They even remove one of the main antagonists in the first book and reduce him into a small cameo. Short Story: It sucks.

Will
08-17-2015, 12:06 AM
Truthfully, the book is usually a lot more detailed than the movie so if you like that sort of thing, like I do, then it makes you appreciate the book even more after seeing a movie adaptation.

SuperSceptile
08-17-2015, 12:32 AM
Also, another one. The Hunger Games. For some reason, the movies just don't sit well with me. I loved the books, and the movies aren't BAD, there's just something about them that doesn't feel right. Maybe it's because they made the last book a 2 part movie when the book is pretty short. With Harry potter and the deathly hallows, it made sense, that's a 700+ page book, but for mocking Jay, that's a 300 page book. Maybe the books just don't work well in the movie format, idk. There's one scene in mocking Jay that I need to see if they have the balls to do on screen. If they don't do that particular scene, the movie will be a complete failure in my eyes.

Shaymin
08-17-2015, 02:08 AM
I've seen some movie adaptations, but not too many to call myself an expert on them. Like the other people in this thread, the ones I've watched were The Hunger Games, Harry Potter (for which I've never read, btw), the Twilight series, and the Percy Jackson series. I'd have to agree that the Percy Jackson movies are bad and totally not faithful, whereas I do believe that The Hunger Games series is pretty faithful to the books for the most part. I've mostly tried not to remember what was in the Twilight movies, as my dad was the one who wanted to watch them. I personally am not a fan of romance focused novels.

Also, let's talk about the movie adaptations that are split into parts. In general, I mean. Who here likes them? I'm fine with them, but I have this weird feeling that it's like the people behind the movie are trying to milk out more money than they should. Mockingjay was... *balancing hand motion* eh with it, I'm okay with it since the first part of the book focused more on the angst of Katniss, but it still felt that it acted more as a cash cow.

Dragonite
08-17-2015, 06:23 AM
There's one scene in mocking Jay that I need to see if they have the balls to do on screen. If they don't do that particular scene, the movie will be a complete failure in my eyes.

I think I know which one you're talking about, and I'd bet money the answer is no. The MPAA has an even dimmer opinion of what's appropriate for kids than the ESRB.


Also, let's talk about the movie adaptations that are split into parts. In general, I mean. Who here likes them? I'm fine with them, but I have this weird feeling that it's like the people behind the movie are trying to milk out more money than they should. Mockingjay was... *balancing hand motion* eh with it, I'm okay with it since the first part of the book focused more on the angst of Katniss, but it still felt that it acted more as a cash cow.

I'm not a fan of having to wait an extra year to see the resolution, but I'd rather have to wait a year than sit through a movie that looked rushed. Final books in the series are generally the ones where the biggest riots will happen if you cut stuff out.

SuperSceptile
08-17-2015, 03:04 PM
I think I know which one you're talking about, and I'd bet money the answer is no. The MPAA has an even dimmer opinion of what's appropriate for kids than the ESRB.



I'm not a fan of having to wait an extra year to see the resolution, but I'd rather have to wait a year than sit through a movie that looked rushed. Final books in the series are generally the ones where the biggest riots will happen if you cut stuff out.

For you first point, that's what I'm afraid of. That scene is so important. It really made the book for me. I'm really hoping it happens. For your 2nd point, I do understand where you're coming from, but for books like mockingjay a 2 part movie isn't necessary. The book is just as long as the 1st 2. Like I said, for Harry potter, I understood, that was a huge book. I will say though, I don't know if they count, but comic book movies have been awesome. Really the only consistently good book adaptions.

sonriopoby123
08-17-2015, 05:22 PM
It honestly deprnds on the book. I don't usually care about the quailty unless it's....super bad (see: The Giver) but most of the time it brings new readers to the series of the movie. I don't really mind movies as I don't have time to watch them anyway.

The Harry Potter series is the one I marathoned and I was satisfied, so I don't know about you...

Tuxy
08-25-2015, 12:33 PM
I've never once seen a really good movie adaptation of a book I liked.
Harry Potter did an okay job, I think (even though the 5th movie was awful), but other than that I can't think of any good one.
I don't think it's impossible to make great adaptations, it's just hard for movies to recreate the atmosphere of a good book, especially if they have to cut out less important parts (which were exactly the parts that made Harry Potter great imo). The only movies that would do my favorite books justice would have to be several hours long, but no one would watch them. That's why I also don't mind splitting up a book into two movies. Usually works better.