Do you approve of book to film adaptations?

Question

Please give specific opinion and reasonings behind them. Are you a purist? Do you prefer word for word, artisitc license, modern interpretation? What are some of you favorite and least favorite adaptations (i.e. 2006 version of Pride & Prejudice was great because..., etc.)? What is your background (i.e. student, teacher, average Joe, etc.)? (This is for a research paper, detailed answers very appreciated and links to information even more appreciated. Thank you.)

Answer 1

I do like an adaptation, IF it is done well. I am a former library worker (and avid reader), film major, and major film buff.

The film doesn't have to be an exact word for word adaptation. What is important is that the spirit of the book is alive in the script. For example, I thought the Lord of the Rings trilogy is one of the finest book adaptations ever. Yet they cut important characters and changed the order of certain events. this was necessary due to time restraints and did not take anything away from Tolkein's story. The same is true for Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. To this date it is the only one of the Harry Potter movies I liked, yet, compared to the rest in the series, it bears the least resemblance to its novel. Because in addition to telling the book's s tory it was also brilliiantly done.

Another example would be High Fidelity. The novel is not very much like the book. THe Jack Balck character is MUCH smaller in the book, and all the characters are British, so they act very differently. By Americanizing it, they changed the story, but it was still good because it kept the attitude and spirit of Nick Hornby's book.

Occasionally I'll even like an adaptiation BETTER. As was the case with the Joy Luck Club. Though I thought Amy Tan's book was great, I did find it a little dull. The movie however, had a much better pace, and was able to tell the same story in a much more entertaining fashion. The same is true for The English Patient. I am sorry if you liked this book, but I found it BOOOORING. But to me, the movie was so breathtakingly beautiful. Each shot was so awesome. I loved it.

My favorite adaptation would probably be To Kill A Mockingbord. Not only is it my favorite book, but one of my favorite movies. Brilliantly directed, brilliantly acted, and holds pretty true to the novel. My least favorite? Probably Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason. What did they do here? Only the first ten minutes had anything to do with what happened in the book and then the rest of it was just Renee Zellwegger running around pouting and acting stupid. I didn't like it.

I hope this helped you. Good luck on your paper.

Answer 2

yes i approve and sometimes they are very good and sometimes even better. a good example in my opinion of the movie being better is A River Runs Through It, the book was very boring but i enjoyed the movie. another adaptation that i truly liked was How Green Was My Valley, it does not completely follow the book but is was a very well made movie.
another movie that is better than the book is Sleeping With the Enemy, much more interesting on the big screen. i think it is difficult to do a movie word for word, it just might be too long. take for example Gone With the Wind, the movies follows the book somewhat but if they had put everything in the movie that was in the book it probably would have been an 8 hour movie. so they left out some things like that Scarlett had two other children before she had Bonnie. the things they left out did not have a big effect on the outcome or the point of the movie. some movies like the Stanley Kubick version of The Shining completley change the ending but the movie and the book were still great.i do not like the 2006 version of Pride and Predudice i prefer the A&E version. i feel this way partly because i do not feel that Keira Knightly was a very good Elizabeth.other movies that i feel had very good film adaptations are To Kill a Mockingbird, Emma, Romeo and Juliet, Much Ado About Nothing, Sense and Sensibility, All the Kings Men, and The Eye of the Needle. i could go on forever but i won't.
my backgound is just an average lover of books and movies.

Answer 3

Depends on the book. And the film. You do have to reach a compromise. Word for word adaptations can be a little slow, while too much artistic license is bound to outrage the book's fans. Surprisingly, few great books have made great films. Everyone loves The Godfather, of course, and the LOTR trilogy was spectacular. Trainspotting was also an instant classic. Harry Potter I'm not so sure about, the books are fun, but they do go on a bit, just like the movies. I would say more but I'm running out of time here. Good luck with your paper.

Answer 4

No, I don't approve of adaptations because they're never the same. Once the author signs over the rights the director takes over and uses artistic license to fit the big screen. The story, "The Notebook" doesn't end the same way from the book to screen and it angers me that this can be done. Mind you the stories don't have to be done verbatim but they should at least hold true to the nuance of the story as the author intended it to be.

Answer 5

i do not ideas the distinction if it holds really actual to the e book. even with the undeniable fact that some books can not be became right into a 2-3 hour action picture with out letting something out. you could not teach on movie what the guy is questioning as you could in a e book, and yet the guidelines each in certain situations advise plenty to the tale. On previous topics as delight & Prejudice I delight in be conscious for be conscious, a well-known-day interpretation purely received't do. i'm a standard Joanne who's a avid reader and action picture watcher. i.e. the Da Vinci Code, i got here around the e book very laboured and that i purely couldn't get into it. yet I observed the action picture and picked the e book up back and now i do not ideas it. yet something like that would not ensue frequently. good success along with your analyze paper.

Answer 6

I read the book The Colour Purple by Alice Walker, and seen the film it was disappointing the movie

Answer 7

I approve. Here's my thoughts on movies from book adaptations.

"If a book wasn't good enough to have a movie made out of it, why read it? And if a movie was made out of the bood, why read it?"

Answer 8

for the most part, no. the "artistic license" part bothers me. the few exceptions are the harry potter movies (not so much #4) & gone with the wind

backround; adverage Jane

Answer 9

Depends, i read Brokeback Mountain after watch the movie and it´s completly different.

Answer 10

most movies are somehow connected to books.

hell even die hard 2 was..
"45 minutes"

Love the tom clancy books turned into movies.