Novel to Movie Rendition
2212 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / back in cr
Offline
Posted 2/13/08 , edited 2/14/08
After watching one of the many Harry potter movies on DVD, I came out of my living room with a slight unease knowing that much of the movie has been simplified to target a more gullible child than a cynical teenager. Of course that was the lest of my movie going problems, since it seems that Mel Gibson tried his luck with hamlet the movie it self was more of an interoperation of Gibson’s life played by chuck Norris (amazingly he has an uncanny similarity) Gibson acts out his crazy screenwriter desire by performing incest love to his mother, making the age gap between Ophelia and hamlet very wide (Chuck is like 34 at least and Ophelia was about 14) and that he hated the English, but is there playing Hamlet of all people. The only novel to movie film that was enjoyable was lord of the rings since basically everything in that movie was gold, I’ll leave lord of the rings near the realms of perfection. Romeo and Juliet, just three words… modern gang war. All in all I dislike these types of movies since its unoriginal, the screen writers take every possible chance to screw up the story, and a lot of people always complain about how the book is better which indirectly affects my option on them.
My question is has anyone ever thought that someone was messing around with the script of the novel to film movie and how have you thought of it?
If there was only one up side to Mel playing hamlet it is that he didn’t try to film Othello, since most likely he would play Lago, with his gratuitously malevolent insanity and Gibson’s crazy a combination of the both of them would either make for a very crippled and obscenely evil chuck Norris imitation or create a sane villain with a fetish for trying to better the lives and reputation of others.
Posted 2/13/08
The incest scene was some weird interpretation thing. Like one play of Hamlet I saw interpreted Ophelia as being pregnant. Mel Gibson did a good job at playing the line between crazy and acting mad, but I have to go for the BBC version over Gibson's.


THe BBC Pride and Prejudice with Colin Firth was brilliant, but I disliked the new version that came out.

LOTR was well done. One of my favorite adaptations to this day.

HP was good when Chris Columbus directed. After that, it kind of fell apart.

Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy was terrible, despite Alan Rickman's performance.

All movies adapted from comics (besides the first two Spiderman movies) need to roll over and die. Hollywood has already abused this idea.
Posted 2/13/08
I think that a book will almost always be better than the movie just because you get more character depth and involvement while reading.

One of the few exceptions I can think of is the Da Vinci Code. I didnt really like the book, cant say the movie was excellent either but it was better than the book. I do not understand why everyone loved Dan Brown so much, personally I think he is a boring writer and I did not like his style. The book was nothing special but the movie managed to add that action aspect that I thought was missing from the book.
Posted 2/13/08

Trivium wrote:

I think that a book will almost always be better than the movie just because you get more character depth and involvement while reading.

One of the few exceptions I can think of is the Da Vinci Code. I didnt really like the book, cant say the movie was excellent either but it was better than the book. I do not understand why everyone loved Dan Brown so much, personally I think he is a boring writer and I did not like his style. The book was nothing special but the movie managed to add that action aspect that I thought was missing from the book.


wow, i've finally met someone who actually agrees with me. i didn't read the entire book because I was so bored with his writing style. he's not as great as everyone claims he is.



oh, and eragon was TERRIBLE in both book and novel.
4512 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116 / F / SMILY♥LAND
Offline
Posted 2/13/08
I enjoyed the novel Memoirs of a Geisha more than the movie. >.<
1418 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F / i.d.k
Offline
Posted 2/13/08
the Golden Compass

Book waay better than the movie. the movie just ruins it. soo diappointing
5097 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Canada, Vancouver
Offline
Posted 2/13/08
Eragon movie was terrible. I used to be an Eragon fan back when I was in grade 6, but now, I see it as nothing more than a gigantic LOTR and Star wars rip-off.

I also hate The Da Vinci Code. The only reason I read it was because Angels and demons, which was another work of Dan brown, was so great. I really loved reading Angels and demons, but The Da vinci code was so boring, I almost quit reading it. It took me a month to finish, which was weird since I always finish a book in 3 days.
7718 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
76 / M / Florida, US
Offline
Posted 2/13/08
Not sure if this is a duplicate but I know of this thread:

Are Books Better Than The Movies

http://www.crunchyroll.com/forumtopic-89918/Are-the-Books-Better-Than-The-Movies.html

Books are more in-depth and allow personal imagination (no limit) but films are very comfortable and can show you something beyond your imagination.
2212 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / back in cr
Offline
Posted 2/14/08

tobydiah wrote:

Not sure if this is a duplicate but I know of this thread:

Are Books Better Than The Movies

http://www.crunchyroll.com/forumtopic-89918/Are-the-Books-Better-Than-The-Movies.html

Books are more in-depth and allow personal imagination (no limit) but films are very comfortable and can show you something beyond your imagination.


pretty sure it has a similarity
very close simalirty
but im asking if you have seen one
either way it took too much time looking through all the movie topics
7718 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
76 / M / Florida, US
Offline
Posted 2/14/08

dj_catmix wrote:


tobydiah wrote:

Not sure if this is a duplicate but I know of this thread:

Are Books Better Than The Movies

http://www.crunchyroll.com/forumtopic-89918/Are-the-Books-Better-Than-The-Movies.html

Books are more in-depth and allow personal imagination (no limit) but films are very comfortable and can show you something beyond your imagination.


pretty sure it has a similarity
very close simalirty
but im asking if you have seen one
either way it took too much time looking through all the movie topics


Yea. lol. I remembered a very similar topic I had posted in so I spent like 3-4 minutes browsing for it since it was so hard to find. (it was like an itch I had to scratch)

I agree that the actors, directors, and/or script-writers will determine the way a character and scenario is portrayed in a specific way. (while a novel will have allowed us to have a different view or our own ideal imagination of the situation) That's a major reason why movies can suck or even be a refreshing get-away. For example, I'll take Richard III as a choice (I'm assuming script for plays also work although it sort of directs where the actual play *live performance* goes); Richard III has many symbolism and ways to depict each scene. Richard III with Cedric Hardwicke in the 50s had artistic features to it that some of us didn't even consider while reading (ie. the nose attachment worn by Hardwicke). The authors have the difficulty of creating a new story that is to be successful. The filmmakers are using the stories which have already been made for them so the problem they face is telling that same story with the limits of budget and actual live manifestation of the imagination.
You must be logged in to post.