Is it true that movie adaptations never do justice to the written word?

Question

I think there are both successful and failed attempts at adapting books (especially classics) into movies. Take The Lord of The Rings for example and To Kill a Mockingbird. Two movies, i feel, that do justice to the original stories. However i must say I'm fairly disappointed in The Chronicles of Narnia and Harry Potter.
Also, how DOES a movie do justice to the original book? Is it just by raking in millions in the box office? Or is it by making the story popular (and hence draw in the crowds)? or is it to be true to the book, with profit only being a secondary motive?

Answer 1

Film and book are two completely different art mediums.

Books that rely heavily on literary form and eloquence as part of their "success" have no chance of being made into a good movie. In fact, they will bomb.

Answer 2

Sometimes they do a good job of capturing the book and sometimes they don't. A novel of average length, say 300 pages, is hard to fit into a movie, so things always have to be cut. Some filmmakers do a better job deciding what to cut than others. And some books are just too involved and all-encompassing to fit into 2-3 hours. Those books might be better as a mini-series (6 one-hour episodes, for example).

Answer 3

I think the movie 'A Time To Kill' did justice to the story but 'Under the Tuscan Sun' was in some ways better than the book, if you can believe that. I think profit is always the bottom line in Hollywood and they always try to target a certain demographic whereas the author of the book is bound to demographics, they are simply trying to tell a good story.

Answer 4

Have to agree about A Time to Kill, I think it really did the book justice.

So did Mystic River.

I'm reading "The Power of One", and from what is so far..I think the movie was better then the book.

HP1 and HP2 really didn't the books justice, but once the directors started doing their own renditions of the books like Hp3, 4, and 5---I think they are really great and their entity.

Answer 5

When talking about the Lord of the Rings, although there are many things that cant be made in the movies, because of the time line, but Peter jackson made a terrific work adapting Tolkien's books in to movies

hope it helped you

Answer 6

I agree with you on TKAMB it has to be one of the best adaptations, I think LOTR was good, but it could have been better.
I think the only way to do justice to the book is to keep the same feel and to convey the same message. I think to my mind a film can get away with changing the story/characters to a certain degree but it must stay true to the books main themes.

Answer 7

Be true to the book? What makes a book so sacred that it shouldn't be made into a film?

Its all opinion. Movies, in nature, discriminate more than a book which leaves much more to the readers personal interpretation. I believe thats why books made into movies often fall short of satisfying everybody.

Answer 8

Yes, I have yet to see a good movie made from a good book.
for instance first i saw the movie "Silence of the lambs " and read the book and I have enjoyed the book, despite watching the movie.

Answer 9

the 1st one is the only one that is had to comprehend that there's no god. loss of information for something is the reason we've self belief it to not be so. God isn't 'particular' in any way, its in easy terms yet yet another theory like multiple others and can be taken care of the two. No documents, no god.

Answer 10

Well....The Godfather did it all.

For television, Stephen King's "The Stand" pretty much got it right, although I hated Molly in the role of Frannie at first. Now, she's seems perfect. Also, at the time, I'd never heard of Gary Sinise. Wonderful as Stu Redmond.

Answer 11

I've always found that books were far better than the movie. First of all there is way more description. Second, it boosts your vocabulary. And third it heightens your imagination.