PDA

View Full Version : Movies Based On Books



DwayneA
03-24-2009, 11:34 PM
I've seen movies based off of books, yet the movie doesn't always exactly follow the book. There are plot changes, new scenes and dialogues, certain things are cut, dropped, or added.

For example, in "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory", there's no mention of Wonka's father in the book. And Wonka is a much nicer guy in the book too. Other examples include the Harry Potter movies.

In short, there's always a lot of changing, adding, or cutting from the original material when it is made into a movie. Why do the producers do this?

DL Hegel
03-24-2009, 11:47 PM
I've seen movies based off of books, yet the movie doesn't always exactly follow the book. There are plot changes, new scenes and dialogues, certain things are cut, dropped, or added.

For example, in "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory", there's no mention of Wonka's father in the book. And Wonka is a much nicer guy in the book too. Other examples include the Harry Potter movies.

In short, there's always a lot of changing, adding, or cutting from the original material when it is made into a movie. Why do the producers do this?
Short answer:
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

sadron
03-24-2009, 11:48 PM
Hmm, it's not always possible to make it as in the book. Maybe they just try to fit the story into 2,5 hours movie. Not all scenes fit in. :(

DL Hegel
03-24-2009, 11:59 PM
Long answer:

It's the story---you must transfer it---from a written medium to a visual one. In order for this to work and depending on the story---the pace must be changed---the point of view might need to be narrowed--characters might have to be changed or dropped or added---action might need to be added---might even need a whole new story arc.

It boils down to two things money---and it's a different medium(different rules apply).

dclary
03-25-2009, 12:01 AM
books <> movies

Atani
03-25-2009, 01:52 AM
Should have put this in the Movies & TV section... then you're posts count! hehe

Generally I think you cannot possibly turn a book into a movie and capture all of the aspects of the story. They are just such vastly different mediums. However, some stories are translated better than others... (good example - Lonesome Dove; Bad Example - The Golden Compass)

I just have to view movies based on books kind of like movies "based on true stories." Only the basic elements are going to be there with a lot of "creative adjustment"

sassandgroove
03-25-2009, 02:00 AM
I've reached a point where I realize that as long as the movie captures the spirit of the book, I'm good with it. As others have said, they are two different media and don't directly translate. Movies need to be faster paced. One example is High Fidelity. In the book Rob spends a lot more time wallowing in his misery when Laura breaks up with him than he does in the movie. YOu can get away with wallowing in the book, but in a movie, watching it, it would get boring.

Sometimes, though, the changes are unforgivable and they are just banking on the title. $$$$


A third option. I think sometimes the producer or whomever thinks they can take source material and "make it better." Occasionally they are correct. Most of the time they are not.

dclary
03-25-2009, 02:45 AM
A third option. I think sometimes the producer or whomever thinks they can take source material and "make it better." Occasionally they are correct. Most of the time they are not.

In some cases, they're both. LOTR without Tom Bombadil? Good. LOTR with green CGI ghost army? Bad.

Sheryl Nantus
03-25-2009, 02:51 AM
you're probably thinking of the horrible remake with Johnny Depp.

get ahold of the first copy, the BETTER one.

there's a difference.

DwayneA
03-25-2009, 04:37 AM
that was "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory". It's a different title than the remake.

sassandgroove
03-25-2009, 04:39 AM
but based on the same story...

Silver King
03-25-2009, 06:04 AM
Should have put this in the Movies & TV section...
Good point, so we'll move it there now. :)