Book to film / TV...

[Susie]

I noticed several things left out of The Lovely Bones movie.

 

But I liked it.

 

Things I noticed:

 

Susie's Mom did not have an affair with policeman in movie.

Susie's Dad was attacked, instead of having a heart attack.

Susie's body was put in sink hole at very end of movie.

I think he put her there earlier in book.

 

There was more, but cant think of them now.

 

I liked the movie better than book .

 

Did anyone else see movie after reading book?

What did you think?

Edited May 6, 2010 by Michelle
spoiler tags added

[Univerze]

Oh. One of my fav books, and I do like the film, I don't see why they changed so much, but especially this is pointless. IN Interview with the Vampire

Louis wants to die in the beginning, because his BROTHER died.. in the film they made it his wife and child.

What, was it too implausible for the general public to have it the original way? Tsss.

[Michelle]

I know it's an old one, but one film which really annoyed me was Jurassic Park - I read the book when it first came out, and loved it, but the film changed so many things. I know why they did it, as it was a typical 'hollywood film', and very successful, but I do think that sticking more to the book would have made a darker, more thought provoking film.

[BookJumper]

... in Interview (which I nonetheless love, having seen it before I read the book), Armand

is also played by a 30-something Antonio Banderas, when in fact he's meant to be an eternally young teenager with 'the face of a Botticelli angel' I understand that using someone actually Armand's undead age might have been frownable upon but surely they could have used a young-looking 18 year old or something...

?

[Univerze]

^haha I agree on that one too. But that was more casting than story.

Funny too, how he suddenly went from having reddish blond curly hair, to straight and black hair... at least they did that better in Queen of the damned, Armand isn't that young there as he's supposed to be, but at least the hair's right. Oh, and that age frowned upon, they could use Kirsten Dunst as Claudia, being that young, then they could use a younger Armand!!

 

 

Another one from that same film..

the ending. In the book, Louis feeds off Daniel, who recovers and goes to trace down Lestat. In the film, I think they couldn't have this, Louis being the good guy, so they changed it so that Lestat feeds of Daniel.

 

And let's not mention Queen of the Damned?? That horrible mashing together of the second and third book in the Vampire Chronicles, :roll:made so many changes to story lines, that nothing makes sense anymore.

[BookJumper]

I managed about 10 minutes of The Queen of the Damned - just what were they thinking?!

[Univerze]

Well I watched the film several times (maybe thinking it'd make more sense the more times I watched it? ) because I love vampires.. and think Stuart Townsend was yummy as Lestat.. although, seriously how can they cast him, he's not blond, and if there's anything specific about Lestat's looks in the books, there's his blond hair!! And Aliyaah was gorgeous. Even though she kinda missed it when being Akasha. Oh and I love Marguerite Moreaux. Kind of have a crush on her. So lots of gorgeous actors, and the soundtrack's nice too. But the story, ehhh. No comment.

[Christie]

[quote name='Sk

[lauraloves]

Lots of the thing in the Harry Potter films bugs me. mainly because everything is normally crammed in and lots of key things are missed out.

 

and the fact that i have to explain all the time whats missed out to people in my family that are to lazy read the books

[Janet]

My views on this are fairly well-known from the designated thread in the Entertainment forum, but Dorian Gray - just ugh!

[Nicola]

... in Interview (which I nonetheless love, having seen it before I read the book), Armand

is also played by a 30-something Antonio Banderas, when in fact he's meant to be an eternally young teenager with 'the face of a Botticelli angel' I understand that using someone actually Armand's undead age might have been frownable upon but surely they could have used a young-looking 18 year old or something...

?

 

This bugs me too. Everything is just so wrong with this element.

 

Well I watched the film several times (maybe thinking it'd make more sense the more times I watched it? ) because I love vampires.. and think Stuart Townsend was yummy as Lestat..

 

Same here....he's gorgeous! But definitely not our blonde wolf killer. I heard a rumour that Anne Rice is in talks with movie producers about remaking Lestat and QOTD as two separate movies, therefore restoring order in the world

 

Erogon was also a let down for me as they changed so much of the book.

 

Also, Slumdog Millionaire which is based on Q&A by Vikas Swarup is completely different to the book in everything except the gameshow theme. However, I prefered the movie. The book as it it probably wouldn't translate too well.

[ian]

It's funny that Peacefield mentions The Shining. Normally I hate films that are completely different from the book, but for some reason, I still like both in that case. The exception that proves the rule perhaps?

 

Also king - Salem's lot. It really annoys me that they swap around the charactor of the vampire and his familiar in the film. James Mason played the latter in the film, but in the book, he would have been the vampire.

 

I also thought they cut a lot of important scenes around Saruman in LOTR.

[Univerze]

I heard a rumour that Anne Rice is in talks with movie producers about remaking Lestat and QOTD as two separate movies, therefore restoring order in the world

 

From the Anne Rice website, in July 2009:

Please be assured that I personally want to see films based on all of these books , and once again let me state that my agents work constantly on possible film projects.

 

I love movies and always have, and it is something of an irony that as of now, only two faithful adaptations of my work have been done. Never have I stood in the way of a production. On the contrary, I have sought to be open in negotiations and in development. But film is a collaborative art form, and the author

[Dimitra]

Sometimes, the changes from the book can be for the better. For instance, in Pride & Prejudice

Darcy proposes to Elizabeth in a living room, while in the 2005 version of the film, he proposes in the garden, while it's raining, so the whole scenery is beautiful and sensual, more romantic.

[BookJumper]

Univerze - thanks for posting that; obviously, there is hope yet a proper The Vampire Lestat movie... now that I would queue up in the rain on one leg to see!

 

in Pride & Prejudice

Darcy proposes to Elizabeth in a living room, while in the 2005 version of the film, he proposes in the garden, while it's raining, so the whole scenery is beautiful and sensual, more romantic.

... *everything within my being starts objecting all at once* no, no, no, no !!!

[Kell]

Sometimes, the changes from the book can be for the better. For instance, in Pride & Prejudice

Darcy proposes to Elizabeth in a living room, while in the 2005 version of the film, he proposes in the garden, while it's raining, so the whole scenery is beautiful and sensual, more romantic.

 

... *everything within my being starts objecting all at once* no, no, no, no !!!

I agree with Bookjumper, I'm afraid! Everything about that film adaptation was just terrible, from casting to scripting to direction to performances. Macfadyen was possibly the worst ever choice to play Darcy (I'm often convinced he's not a real person at all, but a cardboard cutout instead) and Knightly, well, she's basically a stick in a dress and has the acting skills of such to boot.

[Skírnir]

I agree! Eragon was a complete mess up!! I mean they just seemed to ruin everything especially the fact that

Brom died way too early and the wrong way

 

Hah, exactly! Out of all the things they did differently in that film, moving Brom's death scene around stood out for me. It was completely ridiculous.

[Dimitra]

... *everything within my being starts objecting all at once* no, no, no, no !!!

 

Gee, why not? The living room is so dull

[Weave]

It really depends on you, I tend to read the book before seeing the film (if I haven't read it already)

[chesilbeach]

Personally, I prefer to have read the book before I see a film.

 

I'm sure we'd discussed this before and had a quick search through the forum and came up with all these threads which discuss film and television adaptations of books:

 

http://bookclubforum.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=390538

http://bookclubforum.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=390116

http://bookclubforum.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=384741

http://bookclubforum.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=364080

http://bookclubforum.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=305725

http://bookclubforum.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=303443

http://bookclubforum.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=252704

http://bookclubforum.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=252704

http://bookclubforum.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=203619

 

I can't believe there are so many! But interesting to have a trawl through and remind myself of what others had said previously

[Nicola Booth]

I like to read the book first and then if I really like it I will watch film.

 

Otherwise I just imagine the characters in the movie and it kind of spoils book for me.

 

I prefer to be able to say, oh I would definitely have picked her/him for that part when I watch film.

[Brian.]

I always try to read the book first. On the odd occasion ive seen the movie first its always spoilt things a little for me. I also like to see how a movie is visually different from what I imagined in my head when reading the book.

[chesilbeach]

Did you have a particular book/film in mind?

[chesilbeach]

Ahhh, well you've probably seen all our chit chat about the books and the films! You don't need to have read the books before seeing the films at all, but like I said before, I personally prefer to have read the book before I see the film.

 

If you have no interest in reading the books, it shouldn't matter when watching a film adaptation, as it should be able to stand on its own merits.

[catwoman]

Have you watched the previous Twilights? If not then I would recommend watching the previous ones first.

 

As for reading the books first. 'all about preferance. I personally always try as hard as I can to read the books before watching a film, but you don't have to espcially with Twilight. The amount of people who have watched the movies and not read the books.