There was about 8 seconds of dialogue lifted directly from the short story. That was it.
But the worst book-to-movie translation, IMHO, was Slapstick, an excellent satire on paper, an absolute tragedy on celluloid.
looky!
Zen101 said
I reserve the right to name whomsoever I deem as a member of the Dorkus Malorkus Mafia. You sir/ma’am dont’ qualify as of yet. Had you actually ordered the series anew and been enthralled so much to the point of fanboy/girldome then after said instance would you have become a proud member of the Dorkus Malorkus Mafia. Since that is not the case, you do not have the express written permission to say that you are a mafioso of my esteemed dorkus quality.
Have a nice day.
Isn’t the movie supposed to be two books combined? The Vampire Lestat and the Queen of the Damned?
All of your questions regarding the skin exposed in a given film will be answered at Screenit.com.
It’s aimed at parents, summarizing various sorts of inappropriate content so intelligent decisions can be made regarding the attendance of youngsters. In addition to sex and nudity, the site lists stuff like profanity, violence, and smoking, and is much more even-handed than the biased nonsense offered by, say, this guy.
Even though it’s designed for parents, drooling perverts like you (but not me, oh no, not at all) frequently use the site to determine, in advance, whether or not the nudity hinted at in the preview actually follows through to legitimate boobage.
Enjoy. 
Oh, and the answer to your question is no.
Well the guy does need his lawn mowed doesn’t he?
Also another TWO movies that weren’t like the books:
Maximum Overdrive (ok so it was similar) and The Running Man.
Both were also written by Stephen King.
Thank you for pointing me that valuable resource, Cervaise. I will now be able to…errr…avoid movies with purient content.
And I will avoid Queen of the Damned like the clap.
Ah yes… both travesties. Maximum Overdrive was even worse because King wrote the script (based on his story "Trucks), and directed it! Ugh. I like the man’s writing, but he’s no director. He’s better off leaving that side of things to Rob Reiner or Frank Darabont.
And while The Running Man was a terrible, terrible film overall, you have to admit that the choice of Richard Dawson to play the gameshow host was inspired.
Yep.
Ok, misconception clearance time.
There are 2 different short stories invovled here. The short story the movie was “based” on did detail the increased intelligence of a challenged individual will rather horrible results. Think of Flowers for Algernon on crack. The Story you are thinking of was not the one “adapted” for the movie, rather the one with the goat legged lawnmowing horror. Ah King- what HIS dreams must be like. . .
Either way, the movie was not close to the story.
Starship Troopers on the other hand was different, but there was a reason. Verhoven (sp?) delibrately made it “Robocop” style over-emphysing the unsettling political aspects of the book, together with the over-the-top violence of the “Robocop” style which he had received some notice for (mini-high-jack, heh heh the Sunblocker 3000 ad was great).
I think alot of people got wooshed on that movie. Of course they did teeny-bopper it up a bit casting wise :rolleyes: . The movie was meant to be over the top, and was.
I loved the book, and enjoyed the movie. But that’s me.
For what it’s worth, I thnk you’re right… now that you’ve mentioned it, I seem to remember somebody else saying the same thing to me.
Do you remember what the first story you mentioned was called? Was it a King story? I’ve never heard mention of it’s name, though I’ve heard of its existence. I’ve read just about everything King has published, but I can’t for the life of me think of what this story is.
As to the “goat-legged lawnmowing horror” story, that one was actually called “The Lawnmower Man” (most easily found in the King short story compilation Night Shift), so misconceptions on this score are at least understandable. grin
The misconception is yours. The short story that Stephen King sold to New Line, and the short story that is in the credits as being the source material, is in fact the story “The Lawnmower Man,” a story about a murderous goat-demon, and has nothing to do with the script they actually used. Since that’s what was credited, I think it does in fact win as being the least faithful adaptation of all time.
Maybe the screenwriters did take ideas from another story, but the King story credited is in fact “The Lawnmower Man.”
King then later sued New Line over it, and got his name removed from the title.
That part I did know… and it bears noting that of all the adaptations of King’s work to feature films, good or horrible, The Lawnmower Man is the only one not listed on the Stephen King website.
Unfortunately, the short films based on King’s work are not listed in that section. Frank Darabont’s “The Woman in the Room” is well worth seeing, and Jay Holben’s Paranoid: A Chant is actually quite good as well.