Duckhuntdog
Member
I Am Legend, anyone? Thought the Vincent Price adaption was kinda close.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Movies That Are Nothing Like the Books They're Based On
- Thread starter JaseMath
- Start date
- Status
17 Seconds
Banned
Moneyball
BKatastrophe
Member
You could pretty much bring up any superhero comic adaption and it would fit. The biggest one for me, aside from Captain America: Civil War? Jessica Jones. They utilize only one plot thread from the book and pretty much ditch the rest. Even then, that thread is pretty loosely worked from the comic. I still very much enjoyed the show, but it's pretty much it's own thing. Which works, considering it doesn't even share the same name as the core comic that it's pulled from. It's not even the same type of story. Alias is procedural with several arcs that are standalone, but share Jessica's developing life and character as an overall arc. This eventually culminates in the Purple Man arc, which the show basically takes and stretches over an entire series. A bit of a bummer, but as I said I still love the show
It has no prequel.
There's also stuff missing like the evil haunted house and the fish people in the mountains.
Why do I love this so much?
darkwing-buck
Member
I've seen the movie Lawnmower man but what was the book like? Odd movie btw
Chuckie
Member
He probably means predecessor.
Another problem with the Running Man short story is that it ends with the main character suicide running a plane into the bad guy's tower building, which would be a tad uncomfortable post 9/11.
BKatastrophe
Member
I know. It just bothers me that people constantly use that term incorrectly
The 2nd book was so good (my favorite book of the series) and they took nothing from it for the movie.
That show has one of the most annoying, stupid, selfish and any other negative word characters in any show I've ever seen.
There's an alternate ending? I'm not aware of that. I might try to find it on YouTube later. The movie would be bad even if they fixed the ending, but it's definitely the movie's biggest sin.
I've been staring at this for too long.
I like the movie too, but the book, no. Contents aside, it was just badly written. I think I dropped it after just a chapter.
And thank God for that.
Mrs Doubtfire is very different, tonally, from the book Madam Doubtfire on which it was based.
The divorce and subsequent relationship between the parents is much more bitter and dark in the book (I think there's a scene where, after the mother leaves his apartment, he simulates slitting her throat or something). The book is also much more down to earth and isn't really played much for laughs at all from what I can recall. At least not in the slapsticky way the film is.
I remember reading the book as a kid after watching the film and not liking it much because of this, although it'd be interesting to read it again as an adult. I think they basically just took the concept of a dad dressing up as woman to see his kids from the book and then built something very different around it.
The divorce and subsequent relationship between the parents is much more bitter and dark in the book (I think there's a scene where, after the mother leaves his apartment, he simulates slitting her throat or something). The book is also much more down to earth and isn't really played much for laughs at all from what I can recall. At least not in the slapsticky way the film is.
I remember reading the book as a kid after watching the film and not liking it much because of this, although it'd be interesting to read it again as an adult. I think they basically just took the concept of a dad dressing up as woman to see his kids from the book and then built something very different around it.
Relevant to this thread: there's a Youtube series called Lost in Adaptation that looks at how faithful films are to their source material. Spoilers: he didn't like the Percy Jackson adaptations or I, Robot very much.
Zippedpinhead
Member
Silmarillion is definitely impossible for a single movie or even multiples, since there's only the barest amount of continuity. But it'd work as a mini-series.
This is just from hearsay cause I never watched it myself but apparently the adaptation was so bad it put Le Guin off of collabs forever.
Your comment is actually about the American television miniseries. Le Guin licensed earthsea out to ghibli and an American company to perform an adaptation. The American adaptation was the absolutely everything was terrible one she hated. The ghibli adaptation she liked a lot more.
The US miniseries is so terrible. Ruins the plot, whitewashes it bad (one thing she especially hated) and just plain wasn't entertaining. That's not to say that Le Guin liked the ghibli earthsea, just that I think the US miniseries is why she doesn't license it out anymore. (No faith in anyone to adapt)
thetrin
Hail, peons, for I have come as ambassador from the great and bountiful Blueberry Butt Explosion
Here's something really weird. Die Hard is based on a book called Nothing Lasts Forever, by Roderick Thorpe. The book is the sequel to a book called The Detective, which was made into a movie of the same name in the 60's with Frank Sinatra.
So Die Hard is a sequel to a Frank Sinatra movie from the 60's....but not really.
So Die Hard is a sequel to a Frank Sinatra movie from the 60's....but not really.
And the sequels were all unrelated movie scripts reworked into Die Hard movies.
biggersmaller
Banned
Bucket Mouse
Member
The Mask
DiipuSurotu
Banned
Does Frozen count?
Might as well list all Disney movies based off of stories then.
The further you are on the run time of Scott Pilgrim vs The world, the more and more it deviates from the comicbook.
Which actually works as its own thing, and its funny as fuck, but in the movie Scott stays an asshole from start to finish, while in the comics he matures a bit and starts his way to become a better person.
Which actually works as its own thing, and its funny as fuck, but in the movie Scott stays an asshole from start to finish, while in the comics he matures a bit and starts his way to become a better person.
BKatastrophe
Member
The biggest one
I was going to drop that earlier, but I figured the fruit was far too low hanging.
Right here.
Boy was it. That movie is terrible.
They had to pad it out some how.
I was going to drop that earlier, but I figured the fruit was far too low hanging.
Dreamcatcher, the Stand, Needful Things, Pet Cemetary. I liked the beginning of Dreamcatcher but it went to total shit at the end and completely ruined the story. Was pissed walking out of the theater. The Stand was awesome. A few changes but it largely held up. Needful Things needs to be made in today's effects with a decent budget because I remember liking the movie but not some of the choices like the end. Pet Cemetary is close enough. Been far too long now but I don't recall anything unforgivable between book and movie.
I'm really not sure if this counts.
Total Recall / We Can Remember It For You Wholesale
Very different, but share similar concepts. Lots of PKD adaptations are like this. He has amazing ideas with stories that don't translate to cinema tickets too well. So the core ideas remain, but the stories usually shift significantly.
Very different, but share similar concepts. Lots of PKD adaptations are like this. He has amazing ideas with stories that don't translate to cinema tickets too well. So the core ideas remain, but the stories usually shift significantly.
MagnaderAlpha
Member
Yup!
"I am legend... because I found a cure to the Darkseeker disease."
No, no you aren't. That's not why you are supposed to be a "Legend", dammit!
It's painful because the the title has meaning and weight in the book, and the movie shits over that meaning with its own "Hollywood" meaning.
biggersmaller
Banned
Neither are good. I still say the movie is worse, which slapped together a way to bring a T-Rex to San Fransisco while butchering the once awesome eccentric nature of Malcolm for some reason.
Also...
Neither are good. I still say the movie is worse, which slapped together a way to bring a T-Rex to San Fransisco while butchering the once awesome eccentric nature of Malcolm for some reason.
Also...
Yeah, I'm gonna have to agree that the Lost World book was better than the movie.
I read The Lost World as a kid and it was interesting enough for me to finish it.
The movie was one of my first encounters with that "what the fuck am I doing here when I could be doing anything else" movie experience.
While we're talking about Crichton stuff, I think the Sphere movie was much worse than the book. It took some of the same ideas, but spent so much time trying to feel ~epic~ that it lost all of the tension in the book.
This should be the tagline for the show. Just convinced me to watch it.
User 73706
Banned
The Giver (film) is actually somewhat consistent outside of aging up all the characters, but it does change a few fundamental beats that result in a story that never quite lines up with the book. If you think about it, though, it makes sense - they made the movie just different enough that kids couldn't just watch it to do book reports!
bengraven
Member
I'll throw two out there:
With the exception of maybe two or three scenes, the book and movie are radically different.
The Wizard of Oz is probably my favorite film of all time, when I think of it. And it's a very very different animal than it's book, which is also a fantastic read. Dorothy is a bit less sympathetic at times in the book - when the Scarecrow is thought lost on a river, she's like "oh okay, he was a burden anyway". Major scenes include the people made of china (that later were put in the James Franco Oz movie) and a kingdom of door mouses (who save them from the poppies). The Witch was made green and wearing black while before she's this crusty old chubby woman. They just wanted to make a big fairy tale movie and were very free to do what they wanted.
Remember how Julianne Moore's character was the one who was pregnant?
Remember when Clive Owen's character becomes Pope King?
Remember his douchebag cousin he meets early in the film who has those preserved paintings and how he became the main villain, including being in the final one on one battle?
Remember the jealousy over who the father of the baby is?
Yeah, it's really really different. It only shares the theme, setting, and names. It's like if Twilight Princess was an adaptation of Ocarina of Time.
Agreed. Stardust is the first Neil Gaiman novel I ever read and I later picked up the original graphic novel with beautiful illustrations by Charles Vess. It is a holy grail for me and one of my top 10 books of all time. I always have low expectations for a film adaptation though and the changes I saw turned me off of this movie (plus, Danes wasn't Homeland yet and was a weird choice for the character).
I ended up loving it as it's own thing. Like GOT I love both, despite the radical and thematically different stories.
I Am Legend is the best book to never get a true adaptation.
Someday. Hell, a miniseries that's at least 95% true to the book would be fantastic. You don't need a massive budget. You need about 30 people to play bad vampires and
, one house decked out for survival, an empty street to film on, maybe an abandoned library and a couple empty houses and you're fucking good.
Give me filming rights, permits for filming in Detroit, and $10 million and you'll all love me forever.
The Lost World is such a great book that I truly hope someday we can get a true LW adaptation.
It only would take a few tweeks and some character renames to make it, it's so different than the movie. Only the T-rex attack is the same, but can be modified.
That's what's been missing from the last two. The initial large carnivore attack scene lacks the tension, suspense, and excitement of the first two T-rex scenes in JP and JW. That's because of lack of Critchon.
With the exception of maybe two or three scenes, the book and movie are radically different.
The Wizard of Oz is probably my favorite film of all time, when I think of it. And it's a very very different animal than it's book, which is also a fantastic read. Dorothy is a bit less sympathetic at times in the book - when the Scarecrow is thought lost on a river, she's like "oh okay, he was a burden anyway". Major scenes include the people made of china (that later were put in the James Franco Oz movie) and a kingdom of door mouses (who save them from the poppies). The Witch was made green and wearing black while before she's this crusty old chubby woman. They just wanted to make a big fairy tale movie and were very free to do what they wanted.
Remember how Julianne Moore's character was the one who was pregnant?
Remember when Clive Owen's character becomes Pope King?
Remember his douchebag cousin he meets early in the film who has those preserved paintings and how he became the main villain, including being in the final one on one battle?
Remember the jealousy over who the father of the baby is?
Yeah, it's really really different. It only shares the theme, setting, and names. It's like if Twilight Princess was an adaptation of Ocarina of Time.
Agreed. Stardust is the first Neil Gaiman novel I ever read and I later picked up the original graphic novel with beautiful illustrations by Charles Vess. It is a holy grail for me and one of my top 10 books of all time. I always have low expectations for a film adaptation though and the changes I saw turned me off of this movie (plus, Danes wasn't Homeland yet and was a weird choice for the character).
I ended up loving it as it's own thing. Like GOT I love both, despite the radical and thematically different stories.
I Am Legend is the best book to never get a true adaptation.
Someday. Hell, a miniseries that's at least 95% true to the book would be fantastic. You don't need a massive budget. You need about 30 people to play bad vampires and
later get some new makeup to be good vampires
Give me filming rights, permits for filming in Detroit, and $10 million and you'll all love me forever.
The Lost World is such a great book that I truly hope someday we can get a true LW adaptation.
It only would take a few tweeks and some character renames to make it, it's so different than the movie. Only the T-rex attack is the same, but can be modified.
That's what's been missing from the last two. The initial large carnivore attack scene lacks the tension, suspense, and excitement of the first two T-rex scenes in JP and JW. That's because of lack of Critchon.
Nappuccino
Member
A lot of people are mentioning Blade Runner because of it's divergence from Philip K. Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, but the movie is also radically different from the William S. Burroughs' novella, Blade Runner (a movie) from which the movie gets its title.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner_(a_movie)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner_(a_movie)
DeathoftheEndless
Crashing this plane... with no survivors!
Yeah, Last Man on Earth is a good adaptation.
Frankenstein is nothing like the book, but still fantastic.
PROh1bited
Banned
I dunno if it's been mentioned, but Wanted has absolutely nothing to do with its graphic novel.
DeathoftheEndless
Crashing this plane... with no survivors!
Its been a while since I've read the manga, but the Oldboy film is way different.
- Status