The author of the novel Forrest Gump, from which the movie was liberally adapted, died at the age of 77
He started out his sequel, Gump and Company, with the lines.
I have to admit, I’ve never read either book, but I’ve been curious about the differences for a while now. Robert Zemeckis’ movie instincts are good (Roger Rabbit wouldn’t have been anywhere near as good a film if they’d faithfully adapted Gary Wolfe’s novel), and I suspect a faithful film wouldn’t have been as satisfying, but I do have to wonder.
Colin Wilson was unhappy with the way the film turned out. He wrote of it, “John Fowles had once told me that the film of The Magus was the worst movie ever made. After seeing Lifeforce I sent him a postcard telling him that I had gone one better.”
After reading that, my reaction was “Dude, you wrote a book titled The Space Vampires, and you sold the movie rights to Golan & Globus. What the @#$% were you expecting?”
Never saw or read The Magus, but I have seen plenty of awful adaptations. There are lots of them worse than LifeForce.
Forrest Gump wasn’t all that bad, from what I understand. It kept the mentally challenged man encountering the seminal figures and events of the 20th century vibe, even if it made him more lovable and huggable (I don’t think you’d get that with John Goodman playing the lead, even if he has played plenty of sympathetic characters elsewhere).
You want bad adaptation? Try Starship Troopers. or Ice Station Zebra or The Osterman Weekend.
I read Forest Gump years ago and it’s enjoyable but I prefer the movie. My impression of the book is that it’s a zany romp through counterculture but light on character development or pathos, where the movie is absolutely drenched in those, and included very cool pioneering technical work as well.
I’m also one of those Heinlein fans who likes both the book and the movie of Starship Troopers, although I will agree that it’s far from a faithful adaptation.
Winston Groom’s price for the screenplay rights to his novel Forrest Gump included a 3% share of the profits; however, due to Hollywood accounting, the film’s commercial success was converted into a net loss, and Groom received only $350,000 for the rights and an additional $250,000 from the studio.[13]
It was discussed in another thread that Brian Aldiss claimed he only agreed to sell the movie rights to “Supertoys…” because he wanted it made into a Stanley Kubrick film, and that he was dissatisfied with his dealings with Hollywood. Does anyone know what he thought of the finally released film, and whether he saw any of his $2 million (or whatever he was promised)?
Writers for Michelle Pfeiffer’s Dangerous Minds wanted to include a subplot where teacher LouAnne Johnson has an affair with one of her students. For those of you who might not remember, Johnson was a real teacher and the movie was a loose adaptation of her book My Posse Don’t Do Homework. Seeing as how she was a school teacher, she was adamant about them not including such a subplot in the movie and threatened to sue if they did.
Less serious changes included having Pfeiffer wear a leather jacket when whereas Johnson never dressed down like that. She wasn’t there to be the students’ friend she was there to teach them and she wanted their respect. Some of the students were also upset over how they were portrayed saying they never disrespected her like you see in the movie.