Book Adaptations: Let's Complain or Compliment Together

Submitted by El_And_Rose t3_1255qx3 in movies

I do want say, I am not sure if this works here but this seem only subreddit where I can get people talking. Also it can be series/mini series or even different type of book adaptation too. Spoilers are allowed just make sure its known before.

So, my question to ya'll is there a book adaptation you like recommend or even just want complain about?

I been on a Gillian Flynn kick after listening to audiobook for "Dark Places", so I just finish watching movie adaptation that came out in 2015.

Pros:
Charlize Theron and Nicholas Hoult performances
>!Movie was less jumpy around between past and current than book!<

Cons:
Casting choices and omitting of simple character details was off.>! Such as; wrong month of murders, no snow, Libby was written to petite women, Diodrea was described to look more like Joanna Jett looking girl, Chloe's version was cute but, without basic background about how much of bitch she was its hard understand why she would strangle Michelle.!<
All and all it was very water down and felt like it was film in 90s or straight to dvd movie. A mini series would have fair so much better.

While on other hand I also watch Sharp Objects, the mini series on HBO. I'll be reading/listening to book soon.

&#x200B;

I have one more book adaptation I want just complain about. Thirteen Reason Why.
The show has completely different message than book and makes you not like Clay. As person who tried suicide and who can understand Hannah Baker... The book on side of Clay and how he dealt, you are allowed to be angry with Hannah, you are allowed to not understand, because you are taking ride with Clay. Suicide is choice in reality only person committing it truly understands it and show makes it just another teen drama like Degrassi.

0

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Asha_Brea t1_je2kqp9 wrote

The Count Of Monte Cristo (2002):

Pro: It is a great movie.

Con: It does a very poor job of adapting the source material.

5

El_And_Rose OP t1_je2qxvb wrote

That was such a fun read, do you recommend the movie?

1

Asha_Brea t1_je2r834 wrote

The movie is great on its own, as it is really well acted, as long as you don't expect it to be like the book.

2

El_And_Rose OP t1_je2x5u3 wrote

Sounds good, I usually try my best separate them. Like Netflix's live action Death Note isn't bad by itself but as adaptation is was lame.

1

FlattopMaker t1_je3afgn wrote

This film has everything I enjoy, just the right balance of deep thinking, humour, character development, mystery, wisdom, self-reflection, beautiful music, historic and beautiful location shooting. ...and it basically shares the title and the character names with the (compiled serials) book!

1

nlkonskykaramazov1 t1_je3ki1z wrote

The film is weak.

Turning Albert into the count's son was bullshit. It's not because Albert is his biological son that Edmond will necessarily love him. In the brothers Karamazov, Fyodor was the father of 3 children and did not love them.

Mercedes is not the most beautiful woman in the world for Edmond to fight for her as Menelaus did for Helen when she ran away with Prince Paris. He traveling like Odysseus, he would meet other women as Odysseus did, with Circe and Calypso, but without the desire to return to his old relationship.

When Prince Hamlet felt betrayed by Ophelia, he was extremely aggressive towards her. so much so that he hurled insults at her. Kind of naive and simple-minded to think that silly words and an alliance would undo all of Edmond's anger.

The vibes were poorly executed and felt amateurish. It was so obvious that they were a trap that no one would fall for them.

Better if Edmond sought to challenge Fernand to a duel as did Paris and Menelaus.

Not even Villefort would confess to a crime in such an obvious trap.

The 1979 French miniseries is better.

1

iliadwarandpeace t1_je31fr0 wrote

.Insert a stupid and unnecessary dueling scene as the weak gladiator by Ridley Scott. Commodus was murdered while bathing and was not killed in a duel. I don't know what goes through the writers' heads to insert duel scenes and think that everything is resolved with direct confrontations.

It's not because Edmond had a child with Mercedes that he will necessarily care about her years later.

The real general Maximus, the Roman general Tiberius Claudius Pompeianos was married to Lucilla, the sister of Commodus. his wife was executed for conspiring against the room and he did not abuse this and did not avenge his wife with whom he had a child. He preferred a quiet life, he refused to become emperor when offered the position.

Family love and everything is resolved with duels are two unnecessary nonsense in history.

0

One-Panic-8102 t1_je3oulb wrote

Pride and Prejudice (Keira Knightly Movie)- Pros: adapts the meandering book structure into a powerful and affective 3-act-movie structure which managed to connect with modern audiences, no easy feat!

Cons: has the feeling of a shlocky modern romance novel rather than the subtlety and humor of the original. WHY IS DARCY SO BORING AND MEAN? WHY IS ELIZABETH SO BORING? AUGHHHHHH

Pride and Prejudice (90s series): Pros: A more faithful adaptation technically and I’m fully rooting for this Elizabeth, who captures the wit and charm of the original.

Cons: again…why do you all make Darcy so darn boring?!?! There are places in the book where he reacts with clear emotion where these adaptations will have the actor just sit there like a space cadet. He is RESERVED not fully CHECKED OUT. PLEASE.

Emma (2020?): haven’t finished the book honestly but… Cons: just a little too much modern-feeling humor. A little cartoony at points.

Pros: the best adaptation of the tone, structure and subtlety of an Austen novel I’ve seen! The focus on the interpersonal relationships and the ways they evolve and interact with issues of marriage, class, wealth, plus all the annoying (funny) quotidian issues of fussy family and such- so good. Such a great adaptation of austen’s subjects and style.

Anne of Green Gables on Netflix: nooooooooooo

Bridge to Terabithia (90s): haven’t seen it in a while (I was a kid) but I remember being very disappointed. Very 90’s corny where the film could have been as beautiful, artistic and melancholy as the book. From what i remember they also completely gloss over the wealth and gender topics of the main characters in favor of Relatable 90’s Boy and Manic Pixie Dream Girl. Blegh. Wish they remade this one with a good director sometime.

Tuck Everlasting: damn good, maybe even almost better than the book? I liked how they aged Winnie to be older and added a little more of her romance, it made it feel like a more impactful growing-up story. Every actor breathes life into their roles, and Angus especially kills it.

3

El_And_Rose OP t1_je7ljml wrote

I didn't like book Pride and Prejudice so seem to be shame movie didn't do must justice.

OMG Bridge Terabithia with Joshua Hutcherson was my sister favorite but I didn't know there was 90s one.

Tuck Everlasting brings me back to 6th grade, I dont believe we got watch movie in my class for it. I should reread it than find movie.

1

One-Panic-8102 t1_je7lyau wrote

Well if you didn’t like the book, you might actually like the movie better. I might like the movie better if I didn’t like the book so much.

And yes, I actually meant the one with Josh Hutcherson lol. I was like 10 years off whoops 😅 I had no idea it came out when i was a kid. I can not believe Zooey freaking Deschanel was in that. Oh my god. In my defense I was 10 when i watched it and somehow it ALREADY seemed dated.

And yes, you definitely should!

1

kiwi-66 t1_je2rqy4 wrote

War and Peace (1966-67 quadrilogy) - The acclaimed Soviet/Russian adaptation directed by Sergei Bondarchuk. Filmwise, it's a mix of epic spectacle, stunning visuals, period drama, and psychedelic moments all in one.

Pros - Massive scope. e.g. Huge non-CGI battle sequences staged with tens of thousands of Soviet soldiers and cavalrymen as extras/ And stunning cinematography thats often framed like a painting. Also great attention to period details.

Cons - Some of the actors are far too old for their roles. e.g. Bondarchuk himself as Pierre (the guy is suppose to be in his 20's).

Barry Lyndon (1974) - The only existing adaptation of the 1844 William Thackeray novel. Like War and Peace, it has a lot of stunning cinematography that's often framed like a painting, and great attention to period detail. As this is a Stanley Kubrick film, you can expect everything to be perfect.

Pros - Stunning, painterly visuals.

Cons - The story is pretty slow moving and not much exciting stuff happens.

All Quiet on the Western Front (1930 and 1979 adaptations) - This is probably going to be controversial, but IMO these two are better than the Netflix version, in terms of being actual adaptations of the books.

Pros - These two stick far more closely to the book. Paul's friends for example, are far more fleshed out as characters. Also, major events like Paul's visit to his hometown aren't left out. Apart from that, the themes are also very close. e.g. Paul's death which like the book, emphasises the meaningless of individual deaths in war (unlike the gung ho battle in the 2022 version).

Cons - The 1930 version is one of the earliet talkies so the acting is dated. The 1979 version has better acting, but it's made for TV so the production quality is what you get.

2

girafa t1_je2v7fk wrote

I can't imagine War and Peace as a movie in any way, it's so slow in places but not in a really good way. But, I also haven't finished reading it, tbh.

Master and Margarita too, really. I've seen the TV mini-series and it's faithful, it just feels ... really weird.

2

El_And_Rose OP t1_je2urml wrote

Older version I always felt are usually best adaptations. Lot longer movies. my husbands like says no good movie less than two hours.

1

charleyismyhero t1_je2umxr wrote

Strangers on a Train

pros: stylish, classic Hitchcock.

Cons: Hays code era meant a lot of the book got left out. Bruno is such a psychopath, he would definitely make a lot of top 10 villain lists if that movie were more true to the original material

Also in defense of 13 Reasons Why, I just want to say it was one of the more clever whodunnits I’ve seen. It rarely gets talked about in that sense, but it’s structured like a classic mystery, but was one of the most clever takes in a genre that is really particularly difficult to be original in.

2

El_And_Rose OP t1_je2v0e5 wrote

with 13 reason why I agree with ya but, the book was just different and hit so better than show.

1

ZorroMeansFox t1_je302x2 wrote

One of the finest adaptations of a good slim novel I've ever seen was Bill Condon's version of Christopher Bram's book Gods and Monsters (Father of Frankenstein).

Instead of making smart (but major) artistic changes to achieve the same themes/meanings as the source material, as many amazing adaptations have done, Gods and Monsters tried to duplicate the literary material beat for beat, with no bowdlerization, elisions, combining of characters, changes or removal of major scenes, etc. --while also finding a classical visual language which matched the novel's straightforward prose. It's really impressive (--as well as being a movie which, early on, showed that Brendan Fraser was a terrific dramatic actor, playing opposite the world-class Ian McKellen).

2

El_And_Rose OP t1_je35827 wrote

I love good Brendan Fraser movie. I should check that out than

1

iliadwarandpeace t1_je32k29 wrote

Book: The count of monte cristo

Film: The Prisoner of Château d'If (1988)

Pros: tries to portray the story of the book with maximum fidelity

Cons: Insufficient time prevents a complete adaptation of the book

Anime: Gankutsuou

Pros: Fun, dark sic-fi adaptation of the book. seeks to insert the plots and characters of the story.

Cons: Makes some changes that impact the ending of the book.

2

El_And_Rose OP t1_je3530k wrote

Was Gankustsuou a novel or manga? recommend to watch?

2

iliadwarandpeace t1_je36h3g wrote

Gankutsuou is based on the book the count of monte cristo by Alexandre Dumas as well as The Prisoner of Château d'If (1988)

3

iliadwarandpeace t1_je32rfp wrote

Book: The Odyssey by Homer

The Odyssey (1997) by Armand Assante
P'ros: Try to be faithful to the source material
Contr: Insufficient time prevents adapting the entire story of the book and some parts such as mermaids are omitted;

2

Due_Spare532 t1_je3d0re wrote

To Kill A Mockingbird -- great book, great movie, great adaptation

The Shining -- great book, great movie, but not good adaptation

Godfather -- great book, great mobie, great adaptation

Streetcar Named Desire -- great play, play great movie, great adaptation

Wait Until Dark -- great play, great movie adaptation

The Color Purple great book great movie great, adaptation

Misery -- great book, great movie, pretty close to great adaptation

...

2

luanaut t1_je3obf1 wrote

Misery

Pros: Kathy Bates

Cons: Left out basically everything that made the book great

2

grinr t1_je6nxw0 wrote

Both The Road and No Country for Old Men films were like someone recorded the images in my head while reading the books. Incredible adaptations that valued the feelings those books evoked.

2

El_And_Rose OP t1_je7lr3s wrote

I didn't know those were movie adaptations thank you for enlightening me.

1

grinr t1_je7x6gd wrote

Well if you've seen the movies, reading the books will likely be like reading subtitles for your memories. They are just incredibly faithful adaptations.

1

MarilynManson2003 t1_je2ls8c wrote

The Shining

Pros:

  • Some good cinematography

Cons:

  • Garbage adaptation

  • Garbage movie

Jackie Brown

Pros:

  • A perfect adaptation

  • A perfect movie

−5

mikeyfreshh t1_je2m7uv wrote

The Shining fucking rules. It's not a good adaptation but it is one of the best movies ever made

2

MarilynManson2003 t1_je2n8ur wrote

I personally found it to be one of the worst movies I’ve ever watched. It came across as a cheap parody of the book to me.

3

mikeyfreshh t1_je2od5t wrote

The problem is that you're comparing it to the book. Kubrick didn't care about the story, themes, or characters that King wrote. He just wanted to use the setting and premise to do his own thing.

0

El_And_Rose OP t1_je2qs7p wrote

Did you ever watch TV mini series that they did? I remember hearing how it was more faithful to King's book.

2

girafa t1_je2vfv0 wrote

That mini-series is laughably terrible. You might want to watch it just to enjoy how goddamn awful it is. The actors are all over the place, the CGI is ridiculous, it's just... oof.

3

mikeyfreshh t1_je2qvq6 wrote

I haven't seen it. I've heard it is extremely faithful to the novel and also not that good

0

El_And_Rose OP t1_je2qkdn wrote

The Shining I agree, I always felt it was way overrated. I'll put Jackie Brown on my watch list.

1

MarilynManson2003 t1_je2r070 wrote

Jackie Brown is my all-time favourite movie, and Rum Punch is one of my all-time favourite books.

1