I just wanted to observe that, although most H.G. Wells adaptations are pretty bad and/or miss the point, (including Wells’ own adaptation of his Shape of Things to Come) there is one that is surprisingly good –The Man who Could Work Miracles (1937).
There was also a 2001 Hallmark Channel adaptation of several short Wells stories – Hallmark does very good adaptations – entitled The Infinite Worlds of H.G. Wells that told the stories as if they were events in Wells’ life. Pretty good, although they made significant changes in soime of them.
On a fishing trip, director Howard Hawks told Ernest Hemingway he could make a movie based on Hemingway’s worst story. They settled on To Have and To Have Not.
The film is elevated to greatness by the obvious chemistry between Bogart and Bacall, who met on the set and clicked (so much so that Bogart divorced his wife and married Bacall, 25 years younger than him).
I have two- Holes- which was as good as the book, and
Yep, Princess Bride- due to perfect casting.
LotR comes close, but the books are better- slightly. Jackson did a good job of dropping Glorfindel and substituting Arwen . No, a great job. I still miss Tom Bombadil, however.
I concur.
The ending is SUCH a downer- Twain was having a hard time- that to me, I wouldnt bother. The Crosby version is light, fun and entertaining- but inferior.
The book is a bit of a grind. The 1961 Film comes a bit closer, and is fun, but doesnt make the cut.
I found CS Forester better, but O Brians books are pretty good. Just dont binge read them. I got REALLY tired of the same joke with two variations in all or most of the books- Aubrey calls Maturin on deck excitedly- the Doctor is confused, so the Captain points out some tiny sail which is rarely used- vs the Doctor points out a small speck to the captain, which turns out to be same rare bird. Then O’Brians constant playing Lucy and the football with Aubreys finances got really tiring. But still, pretty good if read casually - you likely wont notice those things.
Everyone seems to think that Yankee dates from the depressing end of Twain’s life, probably because of the dark ending. But the book was published in 1889, before Twain’s bankruptcy and the deaths that would so darken his later years. It was a comparatively happy time. And the book was considered to be a kid’s book.
People also appear to feel that “faithful” means “all or nothing”, which it doesn’t. The Bing Crosby version, like the Will Rogers version before it, was mainly a vehicle for the star, and had comparatively little of Twain in it, and none of his “feel”. I’m sure a lot of potential filmmakers are put off by Twain’s writing against the power of the Catholic Church, but you can get around that. (Twain wasn’t so much anti-Catholic as pro-democracy, and he obviously saw in the hierarchical Catholic Church an anti-democratic structure, much preferring the participatory protestant Christianity he was familiar with.)
Every film I’ve seen has discarded most of Twain and the incidents in his book, sometime only keeping the notion of a Time TRaveler succeeding in Arthurian Britain because of their knowledge from the future (and often keeping the eclipse-prediction bit), but without the rest of the book that makes it worth reading. And especially leaving out the Twin wit.
I want to see
The Destruction of Merlin’s Tower
The Restoration of the Holy Fountain. With Fireworks!
THe Rescue of The Boss and The KIng by a company of knights mounted on bicycles
The Boss trying to go out on his Quest and having to deal with a suit of armor. And with Sandy.
The eclipse, too, put in its proper place.
and so on. I could live with a downer ending, in that The Boss and his bunch defeat the combined knights, but it’s a Pyrrhic victory. That almost seems called for in the very premise – Hank Morgan clearly didn’t change history , even with all his technical improvements.
I think most people would prefer the movie Forrest Gump over the book. There are major differences. Personally, while they are different, I think I prefer the book, may maybe because I read it first.
Two excellent movies, as was The Green Mile. However, “The Body” novella on which “Stand By Me” was based was so evocative of my own childhood, that I have to call it a tie.
I actually loved the film The World According to Garp. I thought the foreshadowing and callbacks actually help tie the film together, I especially liked how Garp’s story was illustrated cryptically, with the gloves and the falling piano. (Jenny: “I don’t understand it, but if that’s what it’s about, I like it.”)
The book didn’t have any of the circularity of the film, which is OK, but it did have pages and pages of Garp’s actual story, The Pension Grillparzer, which violated the rule of “if you have a genius artist character, don’t actually show his art, because it will never live up to its in-story reputation.” In the book, you can’t tell if Garp is supposed to be a bad author, or Irving actually is.
Plus there’s the whole last third of the book detailing how every character died. Yes, yes, we all die. But what did it add? I’m glad it was excised.
And also, I prefer the movie ending of The Natural to the book. Sometimes, you just need a happy ending.
I prefer the film The Omega Man to the novel I Am Legend, but I like the novel a lot. It’s just different. (The novel is way better than any of the other movies, though.)
