Comments on: Books on Screen: Adapting to Adaptations

By: Lisa writes...

Lisa writes... — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 22:26:03 +0000

The best adaptation? A&E’s Pride and Prejudice closely tied with The Lord of the Rings trilogy…

The worst? Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince (or, rather, the worst I most recently viewed!)

Great post!

By: Jon

Jon — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 19:25:37 +0000

Bad book to movie conversions? Jumper by Steven Gould. The book is fantastic. The movie is nothing like it.

Another? Starship Troopers. Please. We all know how bad this movie is, but the book is actually pretty good.

For the most part, I don’t mind book to movie conversions. I look at it this way — the movie is a retelling of the same story. It’s not an adaptation of the book — it’s (supposed to be) the same story, told by someone else. As with any story retold by someone else, details are slightly off and parts can be missing. It doesn’t bother me, because I know that I can always go back to the book and re-read it the way I like it.

Besides, the special effects are better in my head.

By: Elizabeth

Elizabeth — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 02:38:06 +0000

I’ve rarely enjoyed a screen adaptation, especially of my favorite books. The changes, even the small ones, really bother me and tend to ruin the whole experience for me. If I do see the movie version of a book, I tend to do so right after I’ve read the book. Maybe I should try the 6-month rule and see if it makes a difference.

Still, even though I read My Sister’s Keeper over two years ago, I will not be seeing the movie.

By: Dawn

Dawn — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 01:55:54 +0000

Okay. I’ve read through this twice now, and I’m still trying to pick my mouth up from the floor from the complete shock I experienced. Erika– I can’t agree MORE with everything you’ve said here. Jennifer knows that I am simply impossible to please with movie adaptations, and TTTW is my hands-down, all-time favorite book ever. (Don’t I sound 12??) I’ve read it 3 times, and I have a huge stack of sticky-notes organized by decade chronicling all of Henry and Clare’s meetings. Yeah, I’m crazy. So, I’m all sorts of terrified about seeing this movie. I finally convinced my hubby to read it this year, and friends of ours both read it too, so we’re planning a double-date on 8/14 to go see it, although everyone has warned me that if I get too obnoxious during the movie, that I’m going to be banished to the front row by myself. AAARRGG about the trailer… I’m bracing myself for major disappointment.

And as far as worst movie adaptation ever– for me, no question about it– 1998′s Les Miserables. It was miserable. Without the s.

Can’t wait for part two of your interview!!

By: Lauren@Baseballsandbows

Lauren@Baseballsandbows — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 21:46:20 +0000

Great post! I have to say that I am almost always partial to the book version. In my opinion the BBC version of Pride and Prejudice is a very well done adaptation, but it is six hours long. I understand that for most silver screen versions, things must be cut (but wouldn’t it be nice if they asked my opinion about what should be cut first).

Great interview! I look forward to reading Part 2!

By: Carrie, Reading to Know

Carrie, Reading to Know — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 21:35:14 +0000

I’m definitely with you on the unnecessary changes! It’d be like if Anne of Green Gables had brown hair or something. Totally would not work. If the author makes a point of a detail, and it’s not a big deal to stick to it – then the movie producers should stick to it!

By: Jennifer, Snapshot & (5M4B)

Jennifer, Snapshot & (5M4B) — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 20:51:53 +0000

Thanks for joining us Erika!

I thought that the Kite Runner was a great adaptation — of course I did exercise my 6 month + rule. I think it had been almost 2 years since I read the book when I watched the DVD.