| I've been rereading one of my favorite books this morning. Roger Ebert's I Hated, Hated, Hated This Movie, a collection of his reviews of bad films. (OOH! And in finding the link I discovered he came out with a new one last year, Your Movie Sucks, which I am totally wishlisting because I must have it.) Anyway. I love this book. And I was reading through it and came to his very funny review of the Demi Moore/Gary Oldman "The Scarlet Letter" (accidentally typed "Demo Moore" there first. Freudian slip.) And it got me thinking. (Obviously. Otherwise this would be a very short post indeed.) I liked the book The Scarlet Letter. It was one of my favorites of the books I was assigned in high school. But of course that film is unwatchable, largely because the filmmakers--and our pal Demo--felt the need to alter it and mess about and change what it means and blah blah blah. (I was reading Empire a few years ago, which is a British film magazine, and they interviewed the director of that terrible Keira Knightley version of Pride and Prejudice. He mentioned how after a screening in the US he was outside and some kid walked out of the theatre, and said director asked said kid how he liked the movie. The kid replied, "It sucked!" And the director used it as an example of how Dumb People Couldn't Understand Why He Needed To Make Great Literature Unrecognizeable. Of course, he just left it at Dumn People Don't Understand, and said something derogatory about the kid "not being his target audience". Well, buddy, I thought your movie sucked too, and I am its target audience. I digress.) Point is, some movies--most movies--made from books just aren't that good. I can think of several exceptions, chiefly of course being the Godfather films (I and II--I pretend the third doesn't exist.) To Kill A Mockingbird was pretty good, and of course the Lord of the Rings films are amazing. There's a lot of them out there. But sometimes they just...fail. And it's especially disappointing when it's a book you love, and so a movie you were excited about seeing. (I still feel a little sick when I think of The Caine Mutiny, which had a great performance by Humphrey Bogart, a great performance by Jose Ferrar, and Fred MacMurray, and is based on my favorite novel of all time, and what a stupid ending they tacked onto the film and how it just ruined the whole thing.) So here's what I'm wondering. What terrible movies can you think of that were made from great books? What books do you think deserve a good movie? |
Blog Archives
Latest Entries
Coming Soon
A book-to-movie translation that really didn't work for me was The Mist. I loved King's novella, which was pretty faithfully followed up until a mind-fuck of an ending, so shockingly ugly as to negate everything that comes before it.
Hate. I feel hate.
I'd love to see a film adaptation of Liz William's Snake Agent and Joe Schreiber's Chasing the Dead. Both would be awesome.
Some people might boo me, but I really didn't like the screen version of "Queen of the Damned."
Eragon was an excellent book... the movie? I have never seen a worse adaption. (I'll try to cut myself off if I flip out too much...)
1. They changed the ending. HOW do you change the ending? Especially when there are (now) 3 more books in the series?
2. It was like Eragon for the ADD. Each scene lasted about 2-3 minutes and something miraculous that took chapters to develop in the book was done in those 2-3 minues. Can't fight? Here, swing a sword... and BAM!
3. They changed the beginning and relationship dynamic of a few characters who later should have been more important.
4. They changed the relationships and dynamics of the evil guys.
5. Angela, who read to me like an older witch, was young, slutty, dressed like Princess Leia enslaved by Jabba, and she spoke like an ass. "Angela knew you were coming... Angela can help you..." (Please read with the slutty, I wanna do you, I'm a whore voice.) Oh, and they took her out of the ending.
6. The ONLY thing I liked was the look of the dragon. That's it. But they changed her development and made her wise beyond her years when she's more naive in the story.
*and I'm spent*
The Scarlet Letter?! *cringes* Dear Lord, that made for the worst year of English classes ever. Especially since they paired it with the Color Purple. Razorblades anyone?
Books made into movies that sucked? Well, there's all the Harry Potter movies for a start. And all of the Anne Rice ones. (Though Kirsten Dunst did a surprisingly good job of Claudia.)
Though I imagine if you watch the movies without knowing the books, they're kinda okay...
Oh- and as to the Jane Austin remakes... I saw a special on BBC and they talked about how each consequetive movie was influencing the next to push the relationships to 'new levels'... which seems to mean make them like each other more obviously and intimate that some almost have sex. *shrug* Go fig.
Oh. Oh. Oh.
I went to an event for Alexander McCall Smith, author of The No. 1 Ladies Detective Agency series.
He reported that that film is in the can and Jill Scott is playing Mma Ramotswe, directed by the late Anthony Minghella.
Should be awesome.
Jaye--I'm with you. I kept waiting for the plot to show up.
Dune. One of the best s.f. novels ever; terrible movie. Deserves a good version, but I think it would be very hard to do now (I hear there's one in the works; we'll see)...somehow, a hero preaching jihad and being referred to as the calling himself Mahdi has a very different resonance now, to Americans and probably many others, than it did in 1974 or even 1986.
Dune. One of the best s.f. novels ever; terrible movie. Deserves a good version, but I think it would be very hard to do now (I hear there's one in the works; we'll see)...somehow, a hero being called Mahdi and preaching jihad has a very different resonance now, to Americans and probably many others, than it did in 1974 or even 1986.
Lol Skarrah, I love The Color Purple too (and love the movie).
Mark, the No. 1 Ladies movie has already been shown here, it's awesome. They were going to make it into a tv series but I don't know what's happening with that now that Minghella has passed. :-(
Ooh. I'm excited. He did mention the series, but it sounds like HBO is spearheading that venture with the same actors.
Washington Square. The Olivia De Haviland version "The Hieress" added a few liberties but it was totally excellent. The later 1990's remake with Jennifer Jason Leigh and that hot English actor of the day reduced it to a novel about female empowerment. Which it wasn't. Plus she made the main character very grim and humorless...almost pitiful. That's not how I pictured Catherine. Hey, maybe she was like that in the book but the De haviland version pretty much ruined me for the truth.
Oh gawd. Tom Cruise as Lestat. Shoot me. Shoot me then. Shoot me now. Shoot me again to make real sure I'm put out of that misery forevermore.
On the flip side of the coin, I was really impressed with the first Narnia movie. Beautiful example of how lovingly filmmakers can render a 180-page book, as opposed to a 500-page one (*cough*HarryPotter*cough*). I anxiously await Caspian to see if it measures up.
Narnia:TLTWATW was definitely well done. And Caspian is the same director and Adams & Eves. I can't wait! It will be interesting to see what they do next though. Not all of the books are that great for movies. Especially the last written/first chronilogically. And I like that they are doing them in the order they were written, not chronologically for Naria, which so many people think is the 'right' way. I read them in the order written and it made perfect sense to me!
Wow, I actually loved the film version of The Mist Especially the changed ending *ducks*
The worst adaptation I can think of right now is the recent The Golden Compass release. Hideous, confused mess of a movie from a brilliant novel.