Movies made after books

[cinemaddict]

I have a problem with the movies that were made after books... Yes, I know I should simply take them as they are and don't care, but I can't! Not when I know not everybody read the book the movie was made after, and think that seeing the movie should be enough! The books are always better, as a movie is limited in its creation, no matter what Hollywood effects could do nowadays!

I grew up with the Lord of the Rings books, Chronicles of Narnia, more recently Harry Potter, and now I have to watch the movies made after these books... Some turn out acceptable (like Lord of the Rings), some turn out awful! For example, I can't stand the Harry Potter movies, as they don't respect many important details from the book! Concerning Chronicles of Narnia, I don't understand why they had to make the first movie after the second book, and the second movie was made after the fourth book... why didn't they respect the order?

Anyways... What do you think?

[snookumsnort]

Not a big fan too. And you're right, most of the time, the movie doesn't do justice to the book. I wish screenwriters would be more creative and come up with their own stories rather than pattern movies off books. I do think, though, that Lord of the Rings came close. Even Da Vinci Code was not as good as the book.

[Ricky]

Honestly if I have read the book then I will not watch the movie. There is no point because it drives me a little batty with all the stuff that they don't cover. But the worst thing is that my imagination always has the characters looking different to what they do in the movie, and in my imagination everything is bigger and brighter and better! And so the movie is always a let down.

[Brennan]

It's a love/hate thing with me and movies made from books. While I love to see what can be done and how others take on the book, it usually doesn't do the book any justice. The Harry Potter movies are the perfect example of this. So much gets cut out because the books are quite lengthy and have a lot of detail, however the movie is only about 2 hours long. You can't possible fit everything into that amount of time. Although, I do love the special effects. While my imagination is not lacking, sometimes I cant personally imagine a scene, or a movie can show it in a totally different light that may be more interesting and make more sense. As long as the producers, writers, directors, etc try to stay as true to the books as possible and still keep the movie interesting and entertaining, I don't usually have a problem with movies made from books.

[Toaster_Jesus]

YouTube - That's Hot

[barbiedoll1973_tn]

I have to agree with you about this. The book is always better than the movie I have not read a book yet that the book is not alot better than the movie.
My brother whom loves Steven King books has also said this, and my husband says the same thing.

[Kapow]

Sometimes they're good. The problem with turning Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter into books is probably because they're so long it's hard to get all the details in a 120 minute movie.

Although the movie adaptations of Bridget Jones seem pretty much in line with their original books.