Most disappointing movie adaptation of a book

Gaspode

So folks, as it says above, what for you was the most disastrous movie adaptation of a book? This can be so disappointing particularly if the book was a favourite of yours

The one that springs to mind for me ( as I was talking about it in work today) is the recent Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy which was so seriously awful!

mikemac

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_Food_Nation
Absolutly brilliant book by investigative journalist Eric Schlosser

The movie was rubbish. Top actors like Greg Kinnear and Bruce Willis couldn't save it.
Cameo from Avril Lavigne too

monkeyfudge

The Handmaid's Tale and Bonfire of the Vanities would be two obvious ones that immediately spring to mind.

Denerick

Lord of the Rings.

Could have been worse, but quite frankly I would have preferred if they never bothered making a film for such a seminal book.

A close second is The Beach.

donaghs

Not exactly a book, but I was expecting something good from the "Judge Dredd" film, and it was awful beyond words.

monkeyfudge

There was actually a hell of a lot they got right about the Judge Dread film.

It's just let down by the fact that they got the title character wrong and gave him an annoying sidekick.

giddybootz

Well when i heard they had changed to ending of The Horse Whisperer when they made it to a film I refused to watch it. Its a favourite book of mine from my early teens and to this day I haven't seen the movie...won't watch anything with Redford now!!

Really loved the LOTR movies but was very sad that Tom Bombadil wasn't in them

Manach

David Brin's "The Postman".

Not only were whole segments dropped, the film lacked the sense of pace & struggle of the book.

zesman

Denerick wrote: »

A close second is The Beach.

Have to agree. I thought the movie adaptation was terrible.

meditraitor

The hitchikers guide to the galaxy was brutal.

High fidelity was a big dissapointment

Iago

Unfortunatly most of the Stephen King adaptations, but in particular The Stand & IT.

The list goes on from there

Juan Pablo

"Stuey" aka High Roller, a shockingly bad adaptation of the book "One of a Kind; The Stu Ungar story"

IrishGooner83

Bringing Down the House by Ben Mezrich was a great book....

I had high hopes for the film version when Kevin Spacey was announced in the cast, However film was a big let down... Great book tho.

Another one was Runaway Jury..... Again thought the book was very well put together with plenty of suspense.... But despite the best efforts of Hackman, Cusack and Weisz the film never had that same edge of suspense!

silvine

The Watchmen for that sex scene alone.

Otis Driftwood

American Psycho


Now before anyone goes off on a tangent about the movie,Bales performance etc let me explain.

A book like AP,is IMO,virtually unfilmable because the best parts of the book are all in Pat Batemans head.One scene that springs automatically to mind is the scene with the business cards.In the book it is just amazingly cringe worthy and you can picture yourself as Bateman.Things like that are simply not transferable to the movie screen(inner-monologues)and I have never seen a movie that has managed to pull the transfer off.This coupled with the toning down of the violence took away from the movie as a whole also.I know Hollywood frowns down on

showing child murders

on screen and

the scene with the lady and the rat couldnt be shown in graphic detail but it could have been implied/off screen etc

as I believe they are 2 of the key scenes in Batemans descent.

Dont get me wrong,its not that its a bad movie,AFAIC its Bales career best performance but I was so dissappointed with the overall difference between book and movie.

MooseJam

giddybootz wrote: »

Well when i heard they had changed to ending of The Horse Whisperer when they made it to a film I refused to watch it. Its a favourite book of mine from my early teens and to this day I haven't seen the movie...won't watch anything with Redford now!!

Really loved the LOTR movies but was very sad that Tom Bombadil wasn't in them

how did the book end ?

gman2k

Bonfire of the Vanities.

Denerick

MooseJam wrote: »

how did the book end ?

Sauron wins.

994

V for Vendetta

Hunchback

Denerick wrote: »

Lord of the Rings.

Could have been worse, but quite frankly I would have preferred if they never bothered making a film for such a seminal book.

A close second is The Beach.

DUDE NO! Forgive me, but I haven't read through the whole thread, cuz I seriously had to just say NOOO, the adaptations, particularly The Fellowship Of The Ring do the best job that could ever have been done, to what everyone agrees was/is a seminal work. Props to Peter Jackson. Dude, don't be a hater..

pwd

Animal Farm. Because of the changed ending. Completely fncks up the whole point of the book. stupid

im_invisible

id agree with the runaway jury, and hitchikers guide,
one that i havnt seen, but probably will disappoint is the golden compass, really loved the books

Dades

gman2k wrote: »

Bonfire of the Vanities.

+100.

Melanie fcuking Griffith? :pac:

godspal

All the Pretty Horses was just terrible.

bladespin

I am Legend - what a waste of a good story.

Denerick

CKonetheonlyone wrote: »

DUDE NO! Forgive me, but I haven't read through the whole thread, cuz I seriously had to just say NOOO, the adaptations, particularly The Fellowship Of The Ring do the best job that could ever have been done, to what everyone agrees was/is a seminal work. Props to Peter Jackson. Dude, don't be a hater..

Please do not EVER use the word Dude again.

Gaspode

I enjoyed the LOTR movies to be honest, and was glad that a lot was left out, lets face it reading about dwarves family history and having them sing for pages on end is bad enough in a book, but in a movie would be torture.

I was also disappointed with the film Contact, based on Carl Sagan's novel of the same name. Didnt like the lead lady as played by jodie Foster, she wasnt right for the part, and the huge central theme of religious awakening/revelation wasn't explored properly. Not a brilliant novel to be fair, but it certainly became a crap movie!

hkcharlie

zesman wrote: »

Have to agree. I thought the movie adaptation was terrible.

That was really really bad, that final scene in the film where they are having a party on the beach with stacked up speakers and a dj booth. What a waste of a decent tale.

hkcharlie

BLACK HAWK DOWN

seriously, they may aswell have rewritten so that the yanks won and came back to a ticker tape parade.
Absolute US cinema hype, RUBBISH!

The Mad Hatter

994 wrote: »

V for Vendetta

Seconded. I wish they'd stop turning Alan Moore's work into summer blockbusters.

Though a lot of people here seem to think that the best way to adapt a book to the screen is to present you with a facsimile of the book on screen. I think it's far more important that the themes and central feeling of the book be preserved than the plot or superficial aspects of the characters.

Bottle_of_Smoke

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

Fad

A Clockwork Orange was a major dissapointment for me.

cashback

The Rules Of Attraction
Fear and Loathing - I know a lot of people liked the film, I just found it annoying.
I thought The Beach was decent till i read the book.

The Mad Hatter

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

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

"The animals rose up again. And this time, it would work."

Aside from that, the film was very good. ('Aside from that, Mrs Lincoln, how was the play?')

girl_friday

giddybootz wrote: »

Well when i heard they had changed to ending of The Horse Whisperer when they made it to a film I refused to watch it. Its a favourite book of mine from my early teens and to this day I haven't seen the movie...won't watch anything with Redford now!!

I ADORED this book and couldn't wait to see the film... Unfortunately it was one of only two films I have ever walked out of and ruined the book completely for me!! :mad:

Rascaduanok

Iago wrote: »

Unfortunatly most of the Stephen King adaptations, but in particular The Stand & IT.

The list goes on from there

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

Decuc500

Cold Mountain is a favourite book of mine.
The movie was way too earnest and cringeworthy, not to mention the OTT acting.

partyguinness

I read all the "The Famous Five" books when I was 11/12

"Five Get Into A Fix" No. 17

In the book they go skiing to Wales and the whole plot centres around skiing in the Welsh valleys. In the TV adaption there is no fcuking snow to be seen anywhere. Its a misty grey valley.

I have never felt so cheated in all my life.:mad:

"Needful Things" by Stephen King was atrocious.

Hunchback

Rascaduanok wrote: »

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

I thought 'Misery' and Dolores Claiborne were decent adaptations TBH

RuthyB

The Golden Compass

They left so so so much out of the story, and it was just a terrible film anyways.

LOTR

Film wasnt too bad, but it left lots of stuff out, and changed a few bits too

partyguinness

RuthyB wrote: »

The Golden Compass

They left so so so much out of the story, and it was just a terrible film anyways.

LOTR

Film wasnt too bad, but it left lots of stuff out, and changed a few bits too

Yeah LOTR left a lot out including the final battle...but IMO I think it hit the right balance..even with the bits left out (including mixing up the books)..I was getting ready to slate the films but I have to admit..a good job was done:)

Quazzie

Iago wrote: »

Unfortunatly most of the Stephen King adaptations, but in particular The Stand & IT.

The list goes on from there

I'd add Shawshank Redemption to that list.

Denerick

partyguinness wrote: »

Yeah LOTR left a lot out including the final battle...but IMO I think it hit the right balance..even with the bits left out (including mixing up the books)..I was getting ready to slate the films but I have to admit..a good job was done:)

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.

Quazzie

Rascaduanok wrote: »

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

How can you say that with a straight face. They totally changed the storyline, introduced new character, etc.

Its a joke

Linguo

Iago wrote: »

Unfortunatly most of the Stephen King adaptations, but in particular The Stand & IT.

The list goes on from there

Totally agree...for such good books why can't they get the horror movies right?Only seem to succeed with shawshank, green mile etc which are brilliant but his scary ones are so good too!

joeystrider

The Girl With The Pearl Earring

Twas a nice, quick lusty read. Light on the eyes.

The film was like wadding through a sea of overwrought cinematography. Plus Scarlet Johansson was dead. Like a stone with lips.

They also managed to eradicate entirely the small amount of humour that was in the book.

It was one long stream of vermeer style shots. Consequently it felt like it took longer to watch the film than read the book..

Greyfox

Quazzie2002 wrote: »

I'd add Shawshank Redemption to that list.

Why would you add the greatest film ever made to that list?

The Lord of the rings is an example of the film been better than what was a good book!

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

Da Vinci code was a very enjoyable read, rubbish film though!

MooseJam

Greyfox wrote: »

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

Huge disappointment considering the book is up there with the greats

Quazzie

Greyfox wrote: »

Why would you add the greatest film ever made to that list?

Because the film was sh*te and the book was a really enjoyable read. 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.


P.S I'mm well aware that 'Rita Haworth and the Shawshank Redempion' was a novella and not a book for any of the pedants out there.;)

hkcharlie

Greyfox wrote: »

Why would you add the greatest film ever made to that list?

because sometimes it's fun to be controversial.

I never read the book, but I think the film (and I think I'm in the majority here) was good.

Quazzie

I wasn't trying to be controversial. While most ( like yourself) will love the movie, as an adaptation of a book it is a terrible failure. For me that made me not like the movie because I read the book long before seeing the movie and loved it, and because of that the movie felt like a bit of a sell out, and too many changes were made in adapting it to a screenplay.

You might disagree with me about the movie, but anyone that has read the book as well will surely agree that the adaptation was a failure.