# Books \<--\> Movies
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/books-movies/307160
**Category:** Cafe Society
**Created:** [June 6, 2005, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/books-movies/307160 "2005-06-06T17:31:28Z")
**Posts on this page:** 9
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Improv\_Geek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Improv_Geek)
#### Post date: [June 6, 2005, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/books-movies/307160/1 "2005-06-06T17:31:28Z")
Alright folks, I need to know how many other people are with me on this.
I understand the desire to take a book that we love and see it brought to life before our very eyes, to see Gandalf with his hat, or the Captain on his ship, or the kiss that sends a tingle to the toes, just like we read in the book.
But it doesn’t always go that way. Budgets get in the way. Stuff we read doesn’t translate to what we see. People take their own vision. Etc.
So why is it always so important a movie adaptation adhere to the book? I’ve never had a problem keeping movies and books seperate when it was obvious the movie maker took liberties. It wasn’t ever a big deal.
Am I the only one? Or if you did this and had one pair of book and movie which you couldn’t make that separation - why was it?
---
### Author:  [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)
#### Post date: [June 6, 2005, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/books-movies/307160/2 "2005-06-06T18:12:24Z")
Well, if you didn’t want a more-or-less accurate translation of the Book to the Screen why did you either buy/write/film it, or else go to see it?
There have been plenty of films that fulfilled this goal admirably. **Gone with the Wind** , the **Harry Potter** movies, the **Lord of the Rings** series, the Russian **War and Peace** , Fred Zinneman’s **The Day of the Jackal**. None of them is an exact match, but I appreciate the compromises and changes made, and I can easily keep the book and the film separate. Sometimes an author will himself change the work significantly in order to create a more filmasble work (Jeremy Leven’s **Creator** , for instance).
There are other cases where the film changed the book significantly, and I don’t mind, because the result was better. **Who Framed Roger Rabbit?** is extrenmely different from Gary Wolfe’s **Who Censored Roger Rabbit?** – it actually says more about the meaning and significance of cartoons, and is more user-friendly, and a great deal less ambiguous. I don’t mind that Huston changed the downbeat ending of C.S. Forester’s **the African Queen** , or that Christian Nyby and company completely rewrote John W. Campbell’s "Who Goes There? to make **The Thing**. These films are classics.
But it really does annoy me when rewriting is only done to make things different, or to let the directot show off his writing skills, or to completely jack around with the intent of the original. So I’m pissed at Veerhoeven for (the perennial SDMB complaint) **Starship Troopers** , a film 180 degrees away in mood, philosophy, and scientific accuracy from Heinlein’s original. Or the Demi Moore rewrite of **the Scarlet Letter** Or the old Barrymore take on “Moby Dick”, **The Sea Beast** which lets Captain Ahab live(!) and come home to his sweetheart (!!!)
at that point, why even say you based the film on Moby Dick?
---
### Author:  [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)
#### Post date: [June 6, 2005, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/books-movies/307160/3 "2005-06-06T18:17:56Z")
Or the wholesale ditching of everything save the title and a few character names, just for the perceived “ready-made audience” the film maker will have for his piece of cinematic dreck. \*\*I, Robot \*\* I’m looking at you!
Either write your own story or stick as closely as possible to the original. Very few stories are ever improved by the movie treatment. **Cal** noted a few of them.
---
### Author:  [@ZipperJJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZipperJJ)
#### Post date: [June 6, 2005, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/books-movies/307160/4 "2005-06-06T20:16:58Z")
I remember when I read **One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest** in 9th grade. Then i saw the movie and was really really pissed that the movie was SO different than the book. The movie was all from Jack Nicholson’s Character’s POV and the book was someone else.
I still like movies of books, tho 🙂
---
### Author:  [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)
#### Post date: [June 6, 2005, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/books-movies/307160/5 "2005-06-06T21:14:27Z")
Then there’s things like _Heart of Darkness_ and the movie _Apocalypse Now_. Both of them were very good, and for much the same reasons. But the movie changed almost everything from the book. Only the central themes remained, but in a very different setting, and it still worked.
---
### Author:  [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)
#### Post date: [June 6, 2005, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/books-movies/307160/6 "2005-06-06T21:44:59Z")
> [@Chronos](#):
>
> Then there’s things like _Heart of Darkness_ and the movie _Apocalypse Now_. Both of them were very good, and for much the same reasons. But the movie changed almost everything from the book. Only the central themes remained, but in a very different setting, and it still worked.
I agree, but the movie wasn’t called _Heart of Darkness_, either. If you use the title, you are setting up certain expectations in the audience.
---
### Author:  [@Catalyst](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Catalyst)
#### Post date: [June 7, 2005, 6:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/books-movies/307160/7 "2005-06-07T06:44:29Z")
Here’s my take on the matter:
[ul]
[li]If the movie keeps the book’s title, stick as closely to the text as time and budget allow. e.g. Peter Jackson’s version of _Lord of the Rings_ (minus the “Frodo goes to Osgiliath” nonsense).[/li][li]If the movie is to differ greatly from the book, rename it and cite the book as an inspiration. e.g. _Robot Fracas_ starring Will Smith, inspired by _I, Robot_.[/li][li]This is where the “Hi **Opal**!” joke will go in the movie version of this post.[/li][/ul]
As a completely random aside, I expect sometime in the future to be able to buy an Apple iRobot.
---
### Author:  [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)
#### Post date: [June 7, 2005, 7:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/books-movies/307160/8 "2005-06-07T07:33:09Z")
> [@silenus](#):
>
> Either write your own story or stick as closely as possible to the original. Very few stories are ever improved by the movie treatment.
That’s how I feel. Call me picky/whiny/ungrateful, or a million other things but I wasn’t even really happy with the _Lord of the Rings_ movies. I mean, I liked them, but I’d rather they were a few hours longer and with less changes or not filmed at all.
The problem is that your average ~350 page book, if it translates to film at all, will not do so in ~2 hours. I think a lot of these more ambitious projects should be HBO series spanning a few seasons or just left alone altogether.
---
### Author:  [@sewalk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sewalk)
#### Post date: [June 7, 2005, 9:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/books-movies/307160/9 "2005-06-07T09:12:17Z")
James Ellroy has nothing bad to say about _[LA Confidential](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119488/)_ and I find it to be as good in its own medium as the book. He has expressed great admiration for the way his novel was distilled into a screenplay. Many plot elements were dropped but the theme of the story never wavered.
It’s easy to sit and snipe at Peter Jackson but I have to admit his vision stands up fine as a piece of cinema despite the few liberties taken with the original material.
I hope there is a special place in Hell for Paul Verhoeven. _ST_ has a special place in my heart; I first read it while in Basic Training, hiding it in my laundry bag to keep the Drill Sergeants from confiscating it.