Preferring the film to the book

I enjoyed the Prestige but I guessed the ending midway through. I think Nolan is a bit too obvious with his clues. Still, it was enjoyable. It's also great to see David Bowie back on the silver screen.

maestrowork said:

I enjoyed the Prestige but I guessed the ending midway through. I think Nolan is a bit too obvious with his clues. Still, it was enjoyable. It's also great to see David Bowie back on the silver screen.

Click to expand...

OMG! (Wow, that is the first time I have ever typed that.) You guessed the ending half way through? They spent the entire freaking movie saying over and over again that magic was not real and then in the last ten seconds reversed it and said, oh, yeah, by the way, magic is real.

It sucked big balls.

I second Forrest Gump. Awful book, in my opinion.

JohnnyGottaKeyboard said:

OMG! (Wow, that is the first time I have ever typed that.) You guessed the ending half way through? They spent the entire freaking movie saying over and over again that magic was not real and then in the last ten seconds reversed it and said, oh, yeah, by the way, magic is real.

It sucked big balls.

Click to expand...

Technically it wasn't magic. It was technology/science. It's in essence a science fiction.

maestrowork said:

It's in essence a science fiction.

Click to expand...

But only for the last ten seconds.

A couple that haven't been mentioned:

1. 'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button'
(The short story it was based on is just a silly few scenes .. the film takes it to an entirely different level)

2. 'The Firm'
(The ending was *SOO* much better in the film. In both versions our hero was faced with a lose-lose situation. In the film he solved it in a clever way to emerge victorious. In the book he just ran away and hid)

Mac

As much as I enjoy the LOTR universe and movies (which is a looooooot), I'll admit, I cannot make it through those books. I've tried on multiple occasions and has just not worked out. I plan on doing it eventually. But, MAN, it's not easy.

I've been spending quite a bit of time on IMDB recently, and I find it interesting when purists want a carbon copy of the book in celloid. What they don't seem to realise is that a novel and a film are different mediums. In a film stories need to be changed, cut etc to make a good film.

What works in a novel, might not work as a film.

I'm going straight to hell for this...

But name a Philip K. Dick story that has been adapted to film, and I've loved the films more every time.

Screamers? Loved it. Total Recall? Loved it. Minority Report? Loooooved it.

I mean, any film with Schwarzenegger AND Michel Ironsides AND Paul Verhovan can't NOT kick ass. Verhovan movies jam a metaphoric finger up my nose and tickle the pleasure center of my brain. I don't know what it is...the style, the explosions, the huge squibs of blood, or the delightfully subversive undertones that deconstruct everyday society.


Yes, I did like the Starship Troopers movie too!

Weirdly, the only PKD movie translated to the big screen I didn't like was Blade Runner.

Why are you looking at me that way?

Whaaaaaaat?

Zoombie said:

Yes, I did like the Starship Troopers movie too!

Click to expand...

There you go! Starship Troopers. Very underrated movie of a very overrated book.

The behind the scenes stuff makes me smile.

Like, do you know how Verhovan got his actors to react to the bugs?

He ran at them, waving his arms like a bug's mandibles and screaming "BOOGS BOOGS BOOGS! BOOGS BOOGS BOOGS! RAAARRRH AH AMM A BOOOG!"

I think I probably preferred the film "Stand By Me" to the book. But I haven't read the book, so I wouldn't know.....

Oh! I just thought of one. A million years ago when my kids were babes, there was a video (yes, possibly a film but we were young and poor in those days) of Kiplings Just So Stories with Jack Nicholson doing voice-over. I loved Kipling but I'd always loathed his Just So Stories; and I'd always particularly loathed Jack Nicholson (no, I can't remember why - perhaps he reminded me of a lecherous uncle or something...) But that video was an absolute treasure of ours. It was wonderful!

Does anyone have a copy that I can buy?

Zoombie said:

I'm going straight to hell for this...

But name a Philip K. Dick story that has been adapted to film, and I've loved the films more every time.

Screamers? Loved it. Total Recall? Loved it. Minority Report? Loooooved it.

I mean, any film with Schwarzenegger AND Michel Ironsides AND Paul Verhovan can't NOT kick ass. Verhovan movies jam a metaphoric finger up my nose and tickle the pleasure center of my brain. I don't know what it is...the style, the explosions, the huge squibs of blood, or the delightfully subversive undertones that deconstruct everyday society.


Yes, I did like the Starship Troopers movie too!

Weirdly, the only PKD movie translated to the big screen I didn't like was Blade Runner.

Why are you looking at me that way?

Whaaaaaaat?

Click to expand...

Note that Starship Troopers was Heinlein. (And I either never read the book, or read it in the 1960s and don't remember it.)

Man, it's amazing how many Philip K. Dick stories have been adapted. Of all the science fiction writers popular in the 1970s, he would have been 'way down on the list, if I'd been trying to guess who'd get all the movies. I would have guess Heinlein or Clarke, maybe Poul Anderson or Alfred Bester (apparently somebody's finally going to try adapting The Stars My Destination). Maybe even de Camp. (Will anyone ever tackle Lest Darkness Fall?)

Hell, I would have guessed Michael Moorcock before Dick. (There was a lackluster attempt at bringing Jerry Cornelius to the screen, and somebody's finally doing Elric.)

MttStrn said:

I second Forrest Gump. Awful book, in my opinion.

Click to expand...

I felt it failed by trying to combine two incompatible forms of satire. Anyway, it got more and more annoying.

Didn't like the movie, either (simple-minded, cheaply manipulative Baby Boomer button-pushing crap), but it had great production values and a fine performance by Tom Hanks.

(As an example of a work being watered down in adaptation, the book's "Bein an idiot ain't no box of chocolates" became "Life is like a box of chocolates!")

maestrowork said:

Technically it wasn't magic. It was technology/science. It's in essence a science fiction.

Click to expand...

The putative technology was so absurdly unlikely, I considered it fantasy.

Take the first half of that movie and write a new second half, without the fantasy (and without the hoary twin cliche), and continue a plausible story of rival 19th century magicians, and I'd love to see it.

The tv movie The Night Stalker was based on an unpublished novel. Haven't been able to get ahold of the book, but I know this is a case where the adaptation (written by the great Richard Matheson) is considered better.

One thing the movie of The Fellowship of the Ring did better than Tolkien was to make Boromir a complex, sympathetic character, thanks in large part to Sean Bean.

I can't say that the movie adaptation of The Natural was a better work of fiction than the novel, but it certainly leaves you happier at the end.

Mac H. said:

2. 'The Firm'
(The ending was *SOO* much better in the film. In both versions our hero was faced with a lose-lose situation. In the film he solved it in a clever way to emerge victorious. In the book he just ran away and hid)

Click to expand...

I gotta disagree. He screws the Mob out of millions, destroys one of their money-laundering operations, and gets a bunch of people arrested. The Mob, not known for a 'turn the other cheek' attitude, is a teensy bit peeved.

In the book he has to hide for the rest of his life; in the movie he doesn't. I found the book far more believable in terms of living with what he'd done.

In the movie, I assume he disappears in the next scene to become Jimmy Hoffa's close, personal friend.

JohnnyGottaKeyboard said:

OMG! (Wow, that is the first time I have ever typed that.) You guessed the ending half way through? They spent the entire freaking movie saying over and over again that magic was not real and then in the last ten seconds reversed it and said, oh, yeah, by the way, magic is real.

It sucked big balls.

Click to expand...

I like the ending, but this is also a film that I don't think really relies on the ending. I love it because of the way it's set up... flashes forward and back, but really, it's the entire structure of it that's neat. The magic tricks in the film have the pledge, turn and prestige... but so does the movie.

I don't generally believe in saying "the book is better" or "the film is better," because I believe that film and literature are two different media. What works in film might not work in literature, and what makes a good book might not make a good movie. When someone tells me they like the song "Venus In Furs" by the Velvet Underground, I do NOT say, "The book is better." I know some people think that films and books are easier to compare than songs are and books, but I do not.

Having said that, there are times when I enjoy one and not the other. I loved the Ghormenghast film with Jonathan Rhys-Myers, but I tried to read the book, and I could not get through it. There are times when one enhances my appreciation for the other, but this is also the case with Venus In Furs.

Manuel Royal said:

The putative technology was so absurdly unlikely, I considered it fantasy.

Click to expand...

And faster-than-light travel isn't? Or a time machine?

Upthread Fight Club and the Princess Bride were mentioned, and I completely agree. Watching the movies really brought the characters to life for me, which doesn't happen very often.

Also, The Notebook. As a chick, I loved the movie. (wait, my husband does too!) But the book...meh.

Ishiguro's Never Let Me Go is a great book, one of my favorites (perhaps my favorite science fiction novel.) That said, I think I like the movie better.