UN-faithful movie adaptations that are actually good?

bnt · 28-03-2014 12:11AM

Royal Legend wrote: »

The Bourne Ultimatum, the film is so far removed from the book. Was really looking forward to the film after reading the book.

I started reading The Bourne Identity, and found that while it wasn't at all bad as a book, it was horribly dated. I thought the screenwriters did the right thing by updating the story to the present day.

The late Carl Sagan was many things, but a great novelist was not one of them, so I liked how his book Contact was adapted for the screen. The novel has some odd digressions which detracted from the story, I thought. Having Jodie Foster in there also helped, of course.

thegreatgonzo · 28-03-2014 12:20AM

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

Clueless. Better than Emma.

As if!

I preferred the film version of the Princess Bride. Found the book a bit annoying.

Popescu · 28-03-2014 12:32AM

Horror of Dracula (1958) with Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing was much more exciting than the book.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTyBClMmoyQ

Un Croissant · 28-03-2014 12:34AM

I read this thread title as movies that are faithful to the UN.

Edit: Oops already mentioned

syklops · 28-03-2014 12:39AM

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

Clueless. Better than Emma.

Given the choice, Id rather watch 10 things I hate about you, than read the Taming of the Shrew.

MS.ing · 28-03-2014 01:28AM

personally it would be one or the other for me. watch the movie OR read the book. why would you watch or read about something when you already know all the main points of a story

the exception being if it was one of those movies you just cant get your head around how everything fitted together and made sense (Ive stopped doing that now, and just watch it for entertainment and let artistic licence take care of everything else but it is great when you see something and it really does fit together nicely and all the intertwined pieces fit) and so need to watch it again to see if you can get something you might have missed

Lightbulb Sun · 28-03-2014 02:01AM

Tom Cruise is still a totally inappropriate choice to play Jack Reacher but ignoring his physical deficits for the role, he was decent in the film. Overall the movie was pretty good too.

crybaby · 28-03-2014 02:21AM

mike_ie wrote: »

To be fair has there been an adaptation of his work that Moore has actually liked?

He really is a moany old fart isn't he?

V for Vendetta is really underrated in my opinion think it's a fantastic film

Femme_Fatale · 28-03-2014 02:24AM

Agreed. Love V For Vendetta.

asteroth · 28-03-2014 02:44AM

The movie Less Than Zero bears very little semblance to the book but still not a bad movie. Good performances by Robert Downey and James Spader.

Most movies do tie in closely with the book but they are just crap movies. Some notable culprits:

Fatherland by Robert Harris. Rutger Hauer was a poor choice.
Da Vinci Code movie sucked. Book was a page turner though.

Also Total Recall was quite different to the story "We can remember it for you, wholesale." Decent though.

Femme_Fatale · 28-03-2014 02:48AM

Blade Runner is, from what I recall, not that faithful to Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep? but it's still great - if moreso from an aesthetic point of view than in terms of plot. And of course that soundtrack.

28-03-2014 02:50AM

Links234 wrote: »

No, but you can't blame him after the track record of adaptations, the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen was probably one of the most obnoxious adaptations ever, it wasn't just bad it was painful to watch.

Hard to believe it was the same director as Blade :eek:

It was the same director but he had do little input in the finished film that you can pretty much forgive him for the abomination that the film is. Sean Connery controlled pretty much every aspect of the shoot and Norrington came to blows with him on set. The experience was so bad for Norrington that he swore he'd never make a film again.

5uspect · 28-03-2014 02:56AM

Children of Men is very different to the P.D. James novel and much better for it.

kjl · 28-03-2014 03:06AM

Crazy one here, but for me About a Boy is very good and it doesn't follow the book towards the end.

I think it's because I read the book when the movie came out so in my head Hugh Grant was Will the main character. When I went to see the movie, he was exactly how I imagined he would be and the kid Marcus was pretty good too.

Natalia Tena's performance as Elle, Marcus's love interest was not great, but I like her in Game of Thrones so it's interesting to see how she's grown as an actress.

In the end of the movie, there is a music number which Will actually prevented from happening in the book, but it was so well done that it was very enjoyable to watch and felt like all new adventures of Will and Marcus.

There is actually an American TV show adaptation which I have seen the pilot for, it was almost the exact same plot to the movie, but I may check out the next episode after all the Office started out the same way.

Spunge · 28-03-2014 04:06AM

Starship Troopers. Movie was fun, book was boring. And im a big scifi reader, maybe i just wasnt in a politics mood.

Lenin Skynard · 28-03-2014 06:39AM

"Bourne Goes to Paris" was a big let down. I was expecting Melissa Joan Harte to get off with the Olsen twins but alas, I was let down. I blame Matt Damon.

catbear · 28-03-2014 07:03AM

World war z, read book first and then saw movie. Completely different in narrative but equally entertaoning .

A Time To Kill by grishem, really enjoyed the book but the movie surpassed it.

Really enjoyed Lurman's Romeo and Juliet, a refreshing adaptation.

My favorite adaptation though was Lost in Austen, brillent subversion of Pride and Prejudice, especially the Wickem subplot.

Ring4Fea · 28-03-2014 08:45AM

The Universal Drac N Frank N Mummy films of the 30s.

Iron Man . Nothing to do with the 60s origin but gold.

Conan. Conan is a fu-king SCOT with the requisite beard in the books by his creator. That's why his name is Gaelic. Because the CHARACTER is quasi Gaelic. The films suck less than they could however.

Solaris. BOTH VERSIONS. the Clooney version is less faithful but a lovely film.

Basically every Sherlock film ever made except for the 7 Percent Solution.

TwoShedsJackson · 28-03-2014 09:00AM

loyatemu wrote: »

The Shining is an obvious one - Steven King reportedly hates it, and produced his own adaptation of the book, which was terrible.

The book was vastly superior and would have made a much better movie if they could have filmed it properly in the 1980s - stuff like the

moving hedge animals

couldn't be done properly then.

The film is good, just not a patch on the book.

5uspect · 28-03-2014 10:17AM

catbear wrote: »

World war z, read book first and then saw movie. Completely different in narrative but equally entertaoning .

WWZ movie was awful.

Turtyturd · 28-03-2014 10:22AM

Links234 wrote: »

Actually let me elaborate on this look of disapproval, Watchmen was an incredible comic book. The movie Zack Snyder made was more like a series of music videos with Watchmen visuals, it wasn't as bad as it could have been, but it ended up as an unintentionally funny mess.

But I can't stand Zack Snyder in general, everything he does is style over substance

Meh each to their own. For me Watchmen is far from an incredible comic. It's a story which could have been told in half the issues, and the highlight of it is the 'mirror image' issue. LoEG is a much better example of Moore's work for me. The Watchmen film also vastly improved the ending over Moore's.

But I can't stand Moore, everything he does is pretentious, and he is a parody of himself at this stage.

Mr. CooL ICE · 28-03-2014 10:33AM

I thought the Harry Potter films 4-8 were decent. Took out some of the unnecessary crap from the books and were an enjoyable watch. 1 and 2 were just sub-par kids movies that tried to stick too closely to the book. While 3 was decent, it seemed like the children didn't get any acting lessons until after this was finished.

redfacedbear · 28-03-2014 11:03AM

I think Cappola turned some fairly trashy source material into something special with The Godfather.

I was shocked with how poor The Bourne Supremecy book was after seeing the film. The film pretty much jettisons the entire plot (apart from the very basic outline - somebody blames Bourne for something he didn't do and draws Bourne down on himself) and is the better for it.

I found that the book read like one of those 1970 disaster movies - Towering Inferno or somesuch - really poor.

catbear · 28-03-2014 11:19AM

5uspect wrote: »

WWZ movie was awful.

Compared to the book, absolutely but it was rather enjoyable while flying long haul, no thinking involved.

Now if there was a film version of the book it would be pretty intense.

Grayson · 28-03-2014 11:47AM

LordChessington wrote: »

I thought the Harry Potter films 4-8 were decent. Took out some of the unnecessary crap from the books and were an enjoyable watch. 1 and 2 were just sub-par kids movies that tried to stick too closely to the book. While 3 was decent, it seemed like the children didn't get any acting lessons until after this was finished.

There's eight of them?!

I, by accident, ended up going to see the hunger games. I hadn't read the books and hadn't really heard of them. A friend asked me if I wanted to catch a film and he suggested it. I said "Isn't that a twilight type film" He assured me that it wasn't and that it had great reviews.

Two hours later I'm standing in the front of a cinema and looking up at a theatre packed with teenage girls.

I have to say that even though the film is aimed at teenage girls the production values were amazing. They took great care of it. I know it's a rip off of battle royale, but it's an extremely well made rip off. The actors all did sterling work.

Cookie_Monster · 28-03-2014 11:47AM

5uspect wrote: »

WWZ movie was awful.

to be fair so is the book.

Spunge · 28-03-2014 11:51AM

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

to be fair so is the book.

Yeah is a bit overrated at this stage, but a somewhat original zombie apocalypse perspective at least.

Grayson · 28-03-2014 11:57AM

catbear wrote: »

Compared to the book, absolutely but it was rather enjoyable while flying long haul, no thinking involved.

Now if there was a film version of the book it would be pretty intense.

The alternate ending was really dark. I kinda wished they'd gone with it.

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/notyetamovie/news/?a=82090

Ring4Fea · 28-03-2014 12:05PM

Also the Disney version of 20000 Leagues Under the Sea was wonderful, but deviated more than a bit from the novel. Which had no squid. It had octopi.

blatantrereg · 28-03-2014 12:09PM

The movie of Filth is good and is very different to the book, which was called unfilmable. Irvine Welsh is very positive about the movie.

Kick Ass is a good film and has some significant differences from the comic. For example

he doesn't get the girl in the comic. When she finds out he's not gay she hates him, and sends him a video of her going down on another guy - which he shamefully masturbates over

Wanted is completely different from the comic - barely recognisable really - but is a good film.

I have the impression that Mark Millar is quite happy about those films.

UN-faithful movie adaptations that are actually good?

Comments