The Little Mermaid. The link is not to an IMDB page, but rather the text of the story. You’ll note that the meaning of the story is almost exactly inverted in the movie, in so egregious a fashion that one can only conclude that the filmmakers had been sexually molested by Danesmen in their youths and were venting both their rage and their bowels on Andersen’s tale.
League of Extraordinary Gentleman. I really don’t understand this one. If you’re doing an adaptation of a little-known work of literature or comics with a fairly cultish following, why would you go out of the way to make your film unpalatable to the very fans of this work? I can only assume that the studio had an excess of mob money to launder that year and needed a putative money-loser on the books.
I, Robot. Substitute “classic and widely read” for “little known” aboveand you’ve captured my problem with this movie. Add to that the inexplicable decision to show Will Smith rather than Bridget Moynahan naked, and it’s clear that there was a lot of weed on the office when this movie was greenlighted.
What are you looking here for? I’m not even going to mention that trilogy. I’ve decided upon reflection that it does have its good bits and have cancelled my fatwa on Peter Jackson.
Are you referring to the Disney version? If so, add their adaptation of The Hunchback of Notre Dame. The simple fact that they were able to make sequels to these two films is an indicator of the butchery involved.
Other ones:
Instinct, (very) loosely based on Daniel Quinn’s Ishmael. Dune, as murdered (lynched?) by David Lynch. Watchers. One of Dean Koontz’s few readable novels, adapted into an unwatchable movie. He should sue; after all, he ain’t Stephen King, where if you butcher ten or fifteen of his novels (and they have), you have enough raw material to spare that you still end up with The Shawshank Redemption, just by sheer probability.
The Counte of Monte Cristo. The book was the awesomest revenge story I have read in my life, and barring the pages on Sinbad the Sailor, every page worth it.
The movie was full of whiny emo young men whom I wanted to do nothing more than MURDER EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM with a dull knife.
I have this movie. Someone gave it to me. I shudder every time I see it on the shelf.
I don’t mind Little Mermaid or Hunchback. I read the book to Huncback and will shortly read the Little Mermaid story. But it’s Disney. Hunchback the book was good except for all the boring parts about French architecture. I get that that was his real point…but boring.
I understand the theory behind using a dull knife – it’s dull, it’ll hurt more, it’s all Alan Rickmany-- but even so, do you really want to commit that much of your time and energy to their murder? Just release the tigers upon them and be done with it. If you want, you can always record it on video and slo-mo the good parts later.
Only your general awesomeness prevents me from losing all respect for you because of this statement. Well, that and the fact that you already told me your opinion on this book, which is inexplicable given the aforementioned awesomeness.
Ugh. I only skimmed the Little mermaid but I agree. What a bunch of silly claptrap. “Immortal soul” my ass.
Skaldy, the Hunchback thing…you’re not telling me you found the unending architectural discussions interesting, are you? I mean around the middle, right in a really tense point, Hugo wanders off the topic for pages describing old France, the churches, the steeples, and a bunch of other boring stuff.
The
hanging and death of Esmeralda
was treated almost as an afterthought!
And I’ll have to insist on a dull knife I’m afraid!
This one just makes me puke too. Hester Prynne as a sex-positive feminist? And her partner in sin as her true love?
Why would you BOTHER making such a movie, that’s what I don’t understand. If you don’t like the sin and redemption angle of the book, if you don’t like the old fashioned morality, why would you bother using that book as the basis for your movie? Why would you think another adaptation of “The Scarlet Letter” is worth making if you obviously think “The Scarlet Letter”, as written, is such crap?
At least with “Starship Troopers” I can understand…Verhoevan disliked the book itself, and the movie is a disguised critique of the book.
The game was perfect at establishing a creepy mood that freaked you out no matter how many times you’d played it. The story, yes, was amazingly complex and confusing, but they could have kept it basically intact rather than changing it so drastically for the movie.
Also, the barbed-wire thing at the end was just pointless.
The thing about I, Robot, too - I actually liked the movie, once I had reluctantly sat down to watch it. Why they had to rob Isaac Asimov of the title I don’t know. It wasn’t a great movie but it had some elementa I liked, and I loved the way the robot moved.
I often wonder why producer’s buy the rights to a book like I, Robot , and then throw away the whole story in favor of their own. Same query with Starship Troopers.
I have seen the movie and and read the book for Contact. I thought the movie was a good adaptation of the book, but the book was better. How were they the opposites of each other? It has been a while since I saw or read either.
Ordinarily I swear vengeance on anyone who mocks TLM. As it is you, dear, I shall instead unleash the winged, flame-spewing, venomous, etc. monkeys on
::spins wheel to select random doper ::
:: watches in horror as the pointer comes to rest on my own name ::
Crap!!! I only put my name there as a matter of good faith with the rest of you! This thing is supposed to be rigged!
Um… wasn’t I the one who explained to you that that was the point the story? I would discourse further but I have to go fight off these damn dirty apes that are hurling flaming poo at my car.
S’alright. I’ll be needing the sharp blades myself for a little bit,anywhistle.
Yes, I’ve been watching Futurama reruns the past few weeks, why do you ask?
The story I heard about “I, Robot” is that it was an original screenplay, and one of the suits noticed some unintentional similarities to the Asimov stories (like that both had robots). So they just bought up the rights to the Asimov stories to forestall any complaints, and decided as well that lifting the already existing title couldn’t hurt.
I understand the theory behind using a dull knife – it’s dull, it’ll hurt more, it’s all Alan Rickmany-- but even so, do you really want to commit that much of your time and energy to their murder? Just release the tigers upon them and be done with it. If you want, you can always record it on video and slo-mo the good parts later.