It Wasn't Like That in the Book... Book vs. Movie/TV adaptations

[pancake bacon]

On 7/15/2019 at 9:24 PM, joanne3482 said:

Since I loved the movie so much, I've just started reading Crazy Rich Asians, the book. 

I was disappointed on how the affair (or "affair") going on with Astrid's husband Michael was dramatically shifted by 180° in the movie. What happened in the book was such a refreshing take. (Which I understand was ruined after all in the second book. Guess I'm not reading that one…)

Pretty much in general, I've come to accept that it is a rare, rare thing that the movie version lines up on what you envisioned from the book. I've learned to just see the movie adaptation as a movie. Even vastly different physical descriptions of characters, unless it was plot-critical, I've learned to let go. 

But it shouldn't go so far like The Prince of Tides, where the actual character of the Prince of Tides was pretty much eliminated in the movie version, for more canoodling between Nick Nolte and Barbra Streisand. Really?! 

[Bethany]

This maybe should go in unpopular opinions but I don't like the books written by Roald Dahl nearly as much as I've liked the movies.  Usually for me it goes the other way.

[Ohiopirate02]

1 minute ago, Elizabeth Anne said:

This maybe should go in unpopular opinions but I don't like the books written by Roald Dahl nearly as much as I've liked the movies.  Usually for me it goes the other way.

I can see that.  There is an unkindness that permeates the books that the movies leave out.  

[Bethany]

1 hour ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

I can see that.  There is an unkindness that permeates the books that the movies leave out.  

I think that's definitely part of it.  I wonder too if it's because I read the books as an adult so came to them from a different POV than I might have had if I'd read them when I was the intended audience?  No idea.  I do know I could happily watch Matilda over and over again but once through the book was enough!  

[Bethany]

Being originally from the Maritimes (Atlantic Provinces of Canada) it's part of my birthright to love L M Montgomery and have read and re-read the Anne books over the years.  I thought the first two Kevin Sullivan movies (the ones with Megan Follows as Anne) were very good and if they changed a few things I could live with that.  Then along came the 3rd movie.  Just terrible.

Edited February 25, 2023 by Elizabeth Anne

[Grrarrggh]

I much prefer Emily Starr to Anne Shirley in book form and I can mostly say the same re: screen. There's even part of me that still expects Aunt Laura and Dr Burnley to get together when I listen to the Emily books. 

[kathyk24]

The Mayfair Witch tv series is nothing like the books and isn't worth watching. The tv series omits important characters like Mona Mayfair and adds characters who weren't in the books.

[Guest]

This is old news since the movies came out over 10 (almost 20 in one case!) years ago, but I've always found the differences in the 3 Narnia movies interesting.

In LWW, they hewed pretty close to the book, only adding a few scenes that in most cases were pretty effective: showing the Blitz in England at the beginning established visually why the kids were at the Professor's house, and established their dynamic. Having Edmund meet Tumnus in the Witch's castle before Tumnus got statue-fied helped show Edmund's reformation. The only one that was kind of gratuitous was the kids getting caught in the thawing river and temporarily losing Lucy.

In Prince Caspian, the changes were much more obvious, but again mostly understandable. They rearranged events in chronological order, so that it wasn't a flashback within a flashback within a flashback - ok for a book, not so much for a movie. The failed raid on Miraz's castle was again a visual representation of the  simple narrative "things weren't going well" section in the book. The most fundamental changes were removing the sequence where Aslan "liberates" the townspeople, and amping up the conflict with Peter. Poor Peter - his character took a beating.

VDT is a very episodic story, just going from adventure to adventure with only the overall quest for the lords tying it together, so the filmmakers felt the need to have an actual antagonist driving the action - hence upgrading the darkness from one episode along the way to the Villain of the Piece. They also moved Eustace's return to kid-dom to the end, so the big cool dragon could be part of the climax.

Some might decry these changes, but in most cases I understand why they did them, and aside from the gratuitous river scene in LWW and torpedoing Peter in PC, I liked them.

Well...I should add that including the White Witch in PC was one thing (at least they mention an attempt at resurrecting her in the book), but shoehorning her into VDT as well was a bit much.

[JustHereForFood]

 

Looks like Constance Zimmer will play a female version of Myron? As long as it's entertaining, I guess I'm ok with it.

[sugarbaker design]

19 hours ago, JustHereForFood said:

 

Looks like Constance Zimmer will play a female version of Myron? As long as it's entertaining, I guess I'm ok with it.

That's almost as bad as Whoopi Goldberg playing Bernie Rhodenbarr!