Discuss film adaptations of books, comics, shows, etc.
For example, The Last Airbender was horrible, Nolan trilogy was great, etc.
The Last Airbender had such a shitty adapatation it hurt so bad. It was so terribly terribly pathetically bad. The cast doesn't even fit the original, and the acting was quite bad. The bending was nearly decent, except that it would be easier to step to the side instead of waving your arms in a formation. Also everyone is a dumbass in the adaptation. The pacing was bad as well, the script was bad, and a lot of it was bad. My biggest bother is that they spend around half the movie in the Northern Water Tribe when they only spend 15% of the first season in the water tribe. It got an 8% on Rotten Tomatoes. Should've gotten less.
This is how bad they screwed up:
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vmEnapJGQM[/media]
The Tale of Desperaux film adaptation was decent, only a lot of stuff was thrown in there that wasn't in the book, as well as changing Roscuro's (the antagonist, mainly) past completely, entirely changing who he was in the books. They also threw in that vegetable thing the cook talks to.
The film adaptation of Hunter S. Thompson's [I]Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas[/I] is damn good for so many reasons.
One of them is how much passion and effort Johnny Depp and Benicio Del Toro put into their respective roles.
Del Toro did a comprehensive research on Oscar Zeta Acosta (Dr. Gonzo), and even got blood-poisoned as he burnt his forearm with a cigarette, to match the cigarette-burns Acosta had at the time.
And Johnny Depp spent several months living on Thompson's (Raoul Duke) farm- learning how to speak, act, walk etc like him. In addition, Thompson lent out a lot of clothes that he actually wore back then, in addition to his car. Here's a photo of Thompson shaving Depp's head to match his:
[img]http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l04esyGdRg1qbpxjdo1_500.jpg[/img]
I thought The Abyss was pretty good, but then again its been a while since I've looked at both the book and the movie. All I can remember that was off was that there was some cut content like the backgrounds of the main characters.
2012 has been an amazing year for comic book film adaptions.
Watchmen's adaptation was damn fine, in my opinion.
[QUOTE=The_J_Hat;37090894]Watchmen's adaptation was damn fine, in my opinion.[/QUOTE]
Aside from the ending, horribly paced music, overly long fight scenes, and the overly long sex scenes.
It was a pretty great adaptation, bought the director's cut that has the Black Freighter integrated into the movie.
edit: Getting dumbs for some bizarre reason.
It's still one of my favorite adaptations you idjits.
[QUOTE=t h e;37075694]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vmEnapJGQM[/media][/QUOTE]
I want those 24 seconds of my life back.
A Series of Unfortunate Events is on of the most disappointing adaptations I have ever seen.
A History of Violence has barely anything to do with the graphic novel. Some could argue that it is an improvement as the Graphic Novel is all levels of screwed up towards the end.
Although seeing William Hurt being trussed up like the victim of Sloth in Se7en would have been a sure-fire way of ensuring the Oscar, rather than just a nomination
No Country for Old Men, The Road, Mystic River and Gone Baby Gone are text-book examples of books-to-movies adaptations done well. I'm not listing Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter as I did not read either.
Lord of the Rings was a good adaptation, even if it wasn't all that direct. If they did do it directly...yeah, it would be pretty bad.
All quiet on the western Front is great.
Schindler's List.
[QUOTE=kevlar jens;37078410]The film adaptation of Hunter S. Thompson's [I]Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas[/I] is damn good for so many reasons.
One of them is how much passion and effort Johnny Depp and Benicio Del Toro put into their respective roles.
Del Toro did a comprehensive research on Oscar Zeta Acosta (Dr. Gonzo), and even got blood-poisoned as he burnt his forearm with a cigarette, to match the cigarette-burns Acosta had at the time.
And Johnny Depp spent several months living on Thompson's (Raoul Duke) farm- learning how to speak, act, walk etc like him. In addition, Thompson lent out a lot of clothes that he actually wore back then, in addition to his car. Here's a photo of Thompson shaving Depp's head to match his:
[img]http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l04esyGdRg1qbpxjdo1_500.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
Easily one of my favourite films ever, couldn't have been more perfect.
Hunter actually cameo'd as his younger self in that 60's flashback scene which was pretty hilarious.
[QUOTE=The_J_Hat;37090894]Watchmen's adaptation was damn fine, in my opinion.[/QUOTE]
It was way, way too camp and they missed out bits that really I felt were required. I'd say the cinematography was good but it's hard to go wrong when doing direct adaptation panel by panel. As with all his movies, too much fucking slow motion.
I liked it at first purely because hey, they finally got a Watchmen movie done but then I realized it wasn't really doing it justice at all.
[QUOTE=KlaseR;37093525]A Series of Unfortunate Events is on of the most disappointing adaptations I have ever seen.[/QUOTE]
I liked it and feel it was greatly underrated. Very well cast.
[QUOTE=Dan2593;37111450]I liked it and feel it was greatly underrated. Very well cast.[/QUOTE]
I like the movie itself, especially because of Jim Carrey. His character is hilarious.
But it's a horrible adaptation, has little to do with the books.
My favorite childhood film
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/7f/WillyWonkaMoviePoster.jpg/400px-WillyWonkaMoviePoster.jpg[/img]
I want to see a House of Leaves film adaption, if it was handled tastefully it would be great.
Angels and Demons is the worst film adaptation in history.
It's like they took everything that made the book so interesting and suspenseful, and cut it out to make way for "lol bishops dying".
There are very few movies I find better than the books. Fight Club is probably my top pick on that one.
Dan Brown novels are absolute tripe anyways so it's no surprise that the adaptations reflect that.
I have yet to see any of the Stephen King films, are they good?
Quite a few are good, most of the rest are garbage.
The Shawshank Redemption
Stand By Me
Misery
The Green Mile
The Mist
Secret Window
Those are the good ones.
Jurassic Park is not necessarily an example of a [i]good[/i] adaption, but I can say that I liked the move better than the book. Same with Interview With a Vampire.
[QUOTE=The_J_Hat;37130991]Quite a few are good, most of the rest are garbage.
The Shawshank Redemption
Stand By Me
Misery
The Green Mile
The Mist
Secret Window
Those are the good ones.[/QUOTE]
What about The Shining? I have barely read the book and it didn't seem like the best of his but is the movie good?
The Jack Nicholson Shining was good but not a very faithful adaptation.
The 90's miniseries was much better of an adaptation.
It's a good movie in it's own right, but as a Stephen King adaptation, it's pretty loose.
[QUOTE=The_J_Hat;37130991]Quite a few are good, most of the rest are garbage.
The Shawshank Redemption
Stand By Me
Misery
The Green Mile
The Mist
Secret Window
Those are the good ones.[/QUOTE]
I really liked Thinner. It's not as good as the movies you've mentioned, but I still really enjoyed this movie adaption.
I've never seen Thinner, so I couldn't really include it.
The mist rocked
[QUOTE=venn178;37131134]The Jack Nicholson Shining was good but not a very faithful adaptation.
The 90's miniseries was much better of an adaptation.[/QUOTE]
It was better than the book, the book of the Shining isn't that good to be honest.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.