# Great Movies that Betrayed Their Source Material **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [August 18, 2018, 5:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821 "2018-08-18T05:08:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![hogarth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hogarth/32/1773_2.png) [@hogarth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hogarth)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2018, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/21 "2018-08-18T21:25:40Z")
> [@Annie-Xmas](#): > > Both The Phantom of the Opera and Les Miserables stage musicals are much better than the novels they are based on. To repeat in capital letters: STAGE MUSICALS. I don’t think I’d say that “Les Miserables” is much better than the novel, but I’m positive that “Oliver!” is a great improvement on “Oliver Twist” after ditching a lot of Dickens’s stupider plot points. ---
**Author:** ![Andy\_L](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c67d28/32.png) [@Andy\_L](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andy_L)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2018, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/22 "2018-08-18T21:25:46Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > I’ll throw a punch at a well-regarded film. > > Blade Runner, from Philip K Dick’s “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep”. > > The book is more of a character study and examination of the isolation of a disconnected, technocratic society where people can dial in their emotions and the natural world is essential done with. > > The movie is both a mystery and an exploration of the rights of man and what makes a man. > > Both have their pluses, though I think the book isn’t a great read. The book and the movie handle the question of “what is humanity?” in related but different ways. In the book, the question is “Can humans lose their humanity and become just like the androids?” (the android characters try to pass as humans by encouraging cynicism and confusion among the humans - it would make no sense for Deckard in the book to be an android). In the movie, the question is “Can androids have humanity?” (which is why the question of whether Deckard is an android is a valid one for the movie). ---
**Author:** ![RivkahChaya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rivkahchaya/32/8919_2.png) [@RivkahChaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RivkahChaya)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2018, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/23 "2018-08-18T22:12:17Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > This was going to be my answer too. Later books make it clear that the Kansas that Dorothy came from was a pretty bleak and crappy place. What she really missed were Aunt Em and Uncle Henry; and when they were allowed to move to Oz, Dorothy was happy to live there too. You’re exactly right. I don’t know why I didn’t mention that too. By the fourth or so book out of 14 written by Baum (and I read them all again and again) Dorothy is happily settled in Oz, and best friends with the girl ruler of Oz. Toto, of course, lived happily in Oz as well. > [@](#): > > Other ways the movie betrayed its source material were were the “it was all a dream” ending (in the book, Oz is definitely a real place). A great place. Dorothy wants to go home more out of a sense of duty than a sense of longing. ---
**Author:** ![eunoia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eunoia/32/97_2.png) [@eunoia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eunoia)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2018, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/24 "2018-08-18T22:34:55Z")
> [@DesertDog](#): > > Or are they afraid their writing won’t be up to snuff and needs the boost of an established franchise to be successful? A movie needs to get made before even having a chance at being successful. Lets compare: Spectre (2015) IMDb rating 6.8 Rotten Tomatoes 63% Box Office Mojo: Domestic: $200,074,609 Foreign: $680,600,000 Spy (2015) IMDb rating 7.0 Rotten Tomatoes 94% Box Office Mojo: Domestic: $110,825,712 Foreign: $124,840,507 OK, someone will trot out that any comparison is a “false comparison” and fine. But the point is the boost of an established franchise isn’t negligible. Not by a long shot. ---
**Author:** ![Roderick\_Femm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/roderick_femm/32/14875_2.png) [@Roderick\_Femm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Roderick_Femm)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2018, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/25 "2018-08-18T22:46:42Z")
> [@DavidwithanR](#): > > Many screenwriters and directors find their source material too boring and add in a love story that didn’t appear in the original. I would say all of those, regardless of their skill or success, have betrayed their source. Marketing a movie is so different from marketing a book that they almost have to do this kind of thing. An expensive move has to appeal to a huge and diverse audience, not just a lot of fanboys/girls who love the source material. A book can last in print for years with a relatively modest audience because it is relative cheap to produce (more so now for digital books). So frankly I think this kind of criticism is elitist and ridiculous. Any studio that followed it would either go out of business or would not be able to adapt very much source material. Opting for original stories might not be a bad thing, but if you want to see your favorite book on the big screen, you shouldn’t be surprised or upset if elements have been added to widen its appeal. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2018, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/26 "2018-08-18T23:28:55Z")
> [@mbh](#): > > A number of Fleming’s short stories have ended up as subplots in larger movies. You remember the Scene in **Octopussy** , when Octopussy tells Bond about her father? That snippet of dialog neatly summarized the entire short story for which the move was named. “The Living Daylights” became a subplot of a subplot in the movie. Well, the bare bones of the short story _Octopussy_ were used, but rather significantly changed. The character of Octopussy’s father (Dexter Smythe) was indeed a disgraced former agent but: 1. He didn’t have a daughter, or indeed any children. 2. He didn’t take the “honorable alternative” by committing suicide, though Bond assumed he had. Some of the circumstances were updated, which is fine. Short-story Smythe chanced upon a cache of forgotten Nazi gold, killed his guide, then retired to Jamaica. Movie Smythe was assigned to steal a cache of Chinese gold from North Korea, killed his guide and then disappeared. ---
**Author:** ![Penfeather](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/penfeather/32/384_2.png) [@Penfeather](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Penfeather)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2018, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/27 "2018-08-18T23:50:51Z")
> [@DesertDog](#): > > Fine, then let the writer write a screenplay about a black, lesbian British superspy; just don’t call her Bond. Hell, I’d watch it just for the curiosity factor. [Cast Skin from Skunk Anansie as the lead and I’m in.](http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4133/4835236060_07d0147860.jpg) [Also, they should have given her a Bond theme tune.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2meg38JbKIM) ---
**Author:** ![Beckdawrek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beckdawrek/32/3647_2.png) [@Beckdawrek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beckdawrek)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2018, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/28 "2018-08-18T23:56:43Z")
The movie ‘These three’ was based on Lillian Hellman and book ‘The Children’s hour’. A story about 2 lesbians living together and opening s girls school. The movie was about to women and one of them boyfriend, a local doctor. The original story would be never have passed the censores. So Hellman write in the doctor/boyfriend. They remade it later but it still had the doctor/boyfriend character. The book is a poignant story of the 2 women and their struggles. I liked the movies, but they are different than the book. ---
**Author:** ![Horatio\_Hellpop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Horatio\_Hellpop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatio_Hellpop)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2018, 9:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/29 "2018-08-19T09:36:07Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > (Can a movie that was written by the author of the book be a betrayal?) I think so. Consider [Sin City](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0401792/fullcredits), based on a comics series written and drawn by Frank Miller, who wrote and co-directed the film. After about a decade of making well-regarded superhero comics, Miller shifted gears and made a crime comic that was grounded in his view of how the world really is, with no fantasy elements. The film was over-the-top cartoony and made no pretense at realism. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2018, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/30 "2018-08-19T15:12:46Z")
> [@Horatio\_Hellpop](#): > > _A Clockcwork Orange_ and _The Shining_ reportedly didn’t please the respective authors, I’m told. And _Starship Troopers_ reduced some themes Heinlein took very seriously to punchlines, though I’m not very bothered by it. A literal adaptation of _Frankenstein_ is likely impossible, but John Whale’s film is beautiful. > > What are some other great films that took unforgivable liberties with their source novels? I disagree about Frankenstein. I thought that Calvin Floyd’s _Victor Frankenstein/Terror of Frankenstein_ did an amazingly good job, very faithful to the novel. > **[Terror of Frankenstein (1977) ⭐ 5.8 | Horror, Sci-Fi](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0076881/)** > > 1h 32m | Not Rated The 2004 Hallmark TV-movie is also very faithful to the novel, except that a.) Donald Sutherland is WAY too old to play Captain Walton and b.) The Creature is too damned good-looking. You have to wonder what he’s so mad about. > **[Frankenstein (TV Mini Series 2004) ⭐ 6.2 | Drama, Horror, Sci-Fi](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0368730/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_51)** > > 2h 57m | TV-14 Kenneth Branaugh’s version looked as if it was going to be faithful, but veered away significantly at many points. It looks gorgeous, though. And, as pointed out, _Starship Troopers_ started life as an unassociated screenplay that was later shoehorned into being an adaptation, despite being completely at odds with its source material in philosophy, intent, mood, and scientific credibility. It still annoys me considerably. They did the same damned thing with **I, Robot** , which is an appalling thing if considered as an “adaptation”. Some films which were great, despite departing significantly from the source: The aforementioned **Dr. Strangelove** and **Bridge on the River Kwai** (although only for the ending). Similarly, **The African Queen** is pretty faithful, except for the changed ending. **Who Framed Roger Rabbit** departs very significantly fro Gary Wolfe’s novel, but is an excellent commentary on cartoons and our relationship to them. And even to _film noir_. **Pudd’nhead Wilson** , a made-for-TV adaptation of Mark Twain’s novel starring Ken Howard takes large liberties with its source material, but is a helluva good film. I highly recommend it. They left the central twist intact. **The Day the Earth Stood Still** is far superior to the science fiction short story it’s based on, which is the opposite of the way things usually go. I’ve never read the short story that Orson Welles’ film **Touch of Evil** is based on, but I understand the film is far superior and takes substantial liberties. And it’s not a masterpiece, by any stretch of the imagination, but **They Live** is much more entertaining and effective that the short story it’s based on. ---
**Author:** ![Quimby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/22d042/32.png) [@Quimby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quimby)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2018, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/31 "2018-08-19T15:57:24Z")
As a person who tried multiple times to read the Song of Ice and Fire and Lord of the Rings series and just couldn’t get into them (long before they were developed for Movies and TV) I would submit both adaptations as improvements for me. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2018, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/32 "2018-08-19T20:13:57Z")
It’s not a great book or movie, but there’s some amusement value in the adaptation of Ayn Rand’s _The Fountainhead_. In the novel, Dominique Francon marries Peter Keating, then divorces him to marry Gail Wynand, then divorces _him_ to marry Howard Roark, her soulmate. This would never fly in a film adaptation in 1949, though, so Rand’s screenplay of her own novel changed so that Dominique merely broke off her engagement to Peter, and Gail ended their marriage by committing suicide - something his novel-version had considered early on but dismissed. Considering how big Rand was on the theme of not betraying the artist’s work, she knew how to sell out when she had to. ---
**Author:** ![eunoia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eunoia/32/97_2.png) [@eunoia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eunoia)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2018, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/33 "2018-08-19T21:49:37Z")
Apparently Ayn Rand managed to get off meth for awhile after her Hollywood days and wrote The Fountainhead II, a prison drama where Roark turns himself in for rape after coming to accept that the needs of the many do outweigh the wants of a few. The minority characters and scenes of gay love were surprisingly well-realized for the time, including the powerful finale where a transexual woman wrongly imprisoned with men and mentors Roark in math and physics helping him finally get his architecture degree. ---
**Author:** ![Mahaloth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mahaloth/32/1079_2.png) [@Mahaloth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mahaloth)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2018, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/34 "2018-08-19T23:47:31Z")
> [@glee](#): > > ‘Princess Bride’ is a wonderfully amusing film. > > The book is pretty awful. What? No way. The book is a lot of fun, very cute, and stands on its own quite well. And, as already pointed out, the movie is written by the author of the book. > [@Annie-Xmas](#): > > Both The Phantom of the Opera and Les Miserables stage musicals are much better than the novels they are based on. To repeat in capital letters: STAGE MUSICALS. Phantom of the Opera? Yes, for sure. I also love the movie version. Les Mis? The book is amazing, if you get the right translation. The musical is also amazing, though. The movie…was really good, but had some misfires. Les Mis definitely does not betray its source material, either. > [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Well, the bare bones of the short story _Octopussy_ were used, but rather significantly changed. The character of Octopussy’s father (Dexter Smythe) was indeed a disgraced former agent but: [Someone should give their opinion about Octopussy some time](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=173799). 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Suburban\_Plankton](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/suburban_plankton/32/219_2.png) [@Suburban\_Plankton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Suburban_Plankton)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2018, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/35 "2018-08-20T02:28:32Z")
> [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > Well, yeah, if you’re reading the original version by S. Morgenstern. William Golding’s abridgment is pretty good though. You must be talking about a _translation_ of Mogenstern; the _original_ - in Florinese - is magnificent. ---
**Author:** ![DavidwithanR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/3bc359/32.png) [@DavidwithanR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DavidwithanR)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2018, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/36 "2018-08-20T03:19:26Z")
> [@Roderick\_Femm](#): > > Marketing a movie is so different from marketing a book that they almost have to do this kind of thing. An expensive move has to appeal to a huge and diverse audience, not just a lot of fanboys/girls who love the source material. A book can last in print for years with a relatively modest audience because it is relative cheap to produce (more so now for digital books). > > So frankly I think this kind of criticism is elitist and ridiculous. Any studio that followed it would either go out of business or would not be able to adapt very much source material. Opting for original stories might not be a bad thing, but if you want to see your favorite book on the big screen, you shouldn’t be surprised or upset if elements have been added to widen its appeal. I agree. And, at the same time, it’s not a faithful rendering of the story, which is why I said what I said. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2018, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/37 "2018-08-20T03:55:30Z")
> [@RivkahChaya](#): > > Stephen King didn’t like the choice of Jack Nicholson for the lead. He said something like the casting of Nicholson essentially foreshadows that the character is going to go crazy. … Kind of funny, that. Randle Patrick McMurphy was burly, red-haired, with a very Irish way about him. Nicholson was dreadfully miscast for that role, but he managed to pull it off rather well. ---
**Author:** ![Asuka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@Asuka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Asuka)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2018, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/38 "2018-08-20T04:11:21Z")
Not a movie but while I enjoyed Daredevil Season 2 on Netflix especially the Punisher episodes, the episodes themselves took iconic Punisher moments and altered them to make Daredevil the more heroic character at the expense of Frank Castle, completely changing the point of the original comic panels. ---
**Author:** ![CookingWithGas](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cookingwithgas/32/485_2.png) [@CookingWithGas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CookingWithGas)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2018, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/39 "2018-08-20T13:51:23Z")
_The Firm_ movie took a pivotal legal technical plot point and turned it into something completely lame. I do not know why unless they felt they needed to dumb down the plot for the audience. I had read the book first and was completely off balance when this happened until I realized that they had corrupted the plot for the film. _The Hunt for Red October_ movie took a pivotal strategic plot point and turned it into something completely lame. I do not know why unless they felt they needed to dumb down the plot for the audience. I had read the book first and was completely off balance when this happened until I realized that they had corrupted the plot for the film. ---
**Author:** ![CookingWithGas](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cookingwithgas/32/485_2.png) [@CookingWithGas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CookingWithGas)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2018, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821/40 "2018-08-20T14:11:37Z")
> [@DesertDog](#): > > Fine, then let the writer write a screenplay about a black, lesbian British superspy; just don’t call her Bond. Cast Grace Jones! > [@Mahaloth](#): > > Phantom of the Opera? Yes, for sure. I also love the movie version. Which one? There have been several. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-movies-that-betrayed-their-source-material/819821.md?page=3)