Printable View
:ranton:how hard can it be to keep consistency in a series of movies, and follow the books???
why would you change things form one movie to another??? its not like cities move from a couple of square KM to a little block:no: . why would you rearrange the order of sequence, add irrelevent things and not include important things.
if i hadn't read the book, it would have been a very confusing movie:doh:
oh well, the books are awesome, guess that makes up for the crappy movies:rantoff:
which movies?
mainly rettop yrrah ( read back wards :) ) Bob
well when you consider the theme of the book and movie, what do you expect. Reality only comes with quality books and movies.Good grief.
never seen one, never read one :rolleyes:
Try 2001 a Space Odyssey, the book was brilliant but impossible to put onto celluloid, the current ABC series Robin Hood needs to be shot with a ball of the producers own shyte, it is absolute crap.
I enjoyed Ringworld but have never seen it on the big screen and of course there is Philip Dick's 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep' which as a movie was not too bad.
It's the age old problem (well, as long as cinema has been around anyway).
You can't condense a 500 page novel into a 9 hour mini-series let alone a 2 hour movie.
I happen to like the books and the movies (I haven't seen the latest yet).
Huh? Reality only comes with quality fiction? It's a novel. Whether the theme appeals to you or not, it's still a novel.Quote:
Reality only comes with quality books and movies.Good grief.
Personally, I think the Harry Potter novels have done more for teenage boys' literacy than just about everything that came before it combined. That has to be a good thing.
i understand why they have to make it shorter and all that, they cant follow everything in the books, but it annoys me when they cut important things and details. also when they rearrange the order of sequence.
the new movie would be so hard to understand IMO if you had not read the book.
you have to admit they're inconsitent though, take hogsmaede (sp?) for example, in every movie, it is in a different setting, and is of a different size ( it never changes in the book though ;) ). they're is many more but ....meh
maybe they should consider making an extended version like LOTR has????
cheers
The level of frustration increases in proportion to how much you are familiar with, and are a fan of, the story in question.
Both Harry Potter and the Lord of the Rings are brilliant stories (as far as I'm concerned) (I've read The Lord of the Rings about 25 times to date), and the movies pale in comparison. However, the movies in their own right are amazing - awesome vision, and attention to detail. It is sad they cannot reflect the full story, but they, I think, are honest to the story with the castings, the scenes, the vision.
So it may be a proportional response, but at least the visualisation of the printed word is a pretty good viewing!
As to moving pubs - well, it is full of wizards!
Here here.Quote:
Originally Posted by fred.n
How much more can they milk out of it?:rolleyes:
(Actually I have never read a story book in my life. :B )
Ringworld movie? :?Quote:
Originally Posted by Iain
The set musta cost a scrith load of cash.
Blade runner? Issues as to whether or not I cleft the title in twain aside (Bladerunner is one of SWMBO's faves) changing storylines to allow for greater narrative continuity in films is a necessary practice.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iain
Some do it OK, LOTR (except Frodo nearly falling into the fire of Mt doom in the flick) and some poorly, Eragon is quite different, but the Saphira was brilliant IMHO.Quote:
Originally Posted by markharrison
I read a review on the new Potter film and he thought it was shyte.
Yes, Bladerunner, just wanted to see who was awake:D
Ah yes perhaps, but if you haven't read the books, you don't know the sequence nor have any expectations.Quote:
Originally Posted by ss_11000
The process of going from the printed page to the big screen is, probably, the most difficult of any writing project. It gets further complicated by the director trying to fit the words into the scenery.
I remember the movie Sybil and not understanding it at all. Then I read the book. It took reading the book to understand the movie however without having seen the movie, the book would have been most difficult to understand.
fair enough regarding the sequence but alot of it isnt explained so people will understand why these things are happerning or what they are...Quote:
Originally Posted by dai sensei
What ... you mean Harry Potter's just a story :CQuote:
Originally Posted by Wongo
The worst movie I ever saw for not being able to tell the books story and was a total loss if you had not read the book was " Catah 22" Fantastic book ...but the movie :no:
I agree with you Stirlo :2tsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by ss_11000
The lastest movie would be almost impossible to follow whats going on if you havent read the book.
I know they need to condense the story, and due to that a little poetic license is taken with the plot. But with this latest one they have taken the longest book and made the shortest movie :? .
I saw an interview with one of the actors who plays one of the major characters...in this interview he said, he had never read the books and never intended too. The intererview was for one of the earlier movies...but IMHO it reflects the way he has potrayed that character in all the movies of this series he has been in. Im not sayin he's a bad actor...he just does'nt play the character as he appears in the book (IMO :rolleyes: ). I think this illustrates why (in this case anyway)the books differ so much from the movies. They are made buy people who really are'nt die hard fans of the books...its just a job..... and in doing that job they inject they're own personality and sometimes egotisical visions of how something should be done.
These people pretty much know they have a license to print money with this franchise so staying absolutely true to the story probably is'nt on the list of priorities...which IMHO is letting the fans of the books down, just a little bit :( the fans are after all are the ones who pay to go see these movies.
I also disagree that movies made from books are never as good as the books... IMHO the movie "Fight Club" was way better than the book. So it can be done :U
Regardless of what some of the the grumpy old buggers around here say...the Harry Potter series will be considered a classic, once all the young fans grow up to be income spending adults :;
cheers
BD:2tsup:
The movie "Three Days of the Condor" (spy stuff, Robert Redford et al. about 35 years ago) was based on the book "Six Days of the Condor." Would have been difficult to compress the 6 days' adventure into the shorter attention span available to movie viewers. I thought it was faithful enough, and at least they had the decency to change the title.
Joe
cheersQuote:
Originally Posted by Brown Dog