The Scarlet Letter. Hester, Dimsdale and Pearl ride happily off into the sunset.
Being that I saw the movie version of Breakfast at Tiffany’s before reading the novella, I can’t say that this fits the requirements of the OP. However, if I had read the story first, and then saw the movie, it very well might have. At best, I think I would have been pretty disappointed in the film. While the role of
Doc Golightly
and the brief scenes with that character come somewhat close to catching the wistful yearning and melancholy of the novella, the rest of the movie is a light-hearted romantic comedy, enjoyable enough on its own terms, but having nothing really to do with Capote’s great story.
I think they’ve done an admirable job with the books so far. I was very disappointed with Dawn Treader (my favorite of the books), but in the end I realized it was because they tried too hard to stay with the book’s storyline.
That’s because it was a great action movie about a detective chasing robots that weren’t replicants, until someone said, hey, this is a lot like Asimov’s stuff, at which point they picked up the rights, grafted a few details onto the finished (and, IIRC, in production) screenplay, and there you go.
I was going to cite this, and add that the narrator (who was a gayer-than-gay Truman Capote prototype, and thus a harmless girlfriend for the female protagonist to get close to with zero sexual tension) has been changed into a male lead who marries the protagonist in the end.
I see your point, and it is one of the weaker Ford/Fonda collaborations, but it’s still a decent film on it’s own terms, and it has some truly fantastic acting in it. It hasn’t aged particularly well, but I doubt you could film that book in it’s entirety today, especially not the final scene with Rose Of Sharon breastfeeding the starving man with the milk meant for her dead baby.
Some more wonderfully awful adaptations have been mentioned. How could I have forgotten how much they warped “Breakfast at Tiffanys”?
For screwing up the classics how about Disney giving Hunchback of Notre Dame a happy ending? Making a cartoon out of it in the first place was a stupid idea
re Grapes of Wrath - yeah you could film that end scene today. I mean you have people pissing people and giving blow jobs in main stream films.
See if you can find the American Playhouse DVD of the stage play by Frank Galati that starred Gary Sinise and Lois Smith. In spite of the limits that a live stage performance has, it is far more true to the novel than Nunnally Johnson’s screenplay.
The horrible remake of The Haunting starring Catherine Zeta-Jones and Liam Neeson and who cares who else? The 1963 adaptation was wonderful; one of my all-time favorites. The redux was a bloated CG crapfest. Ugh. Sorry, Shirley.
Dune
I can’t believe I’m the first to mention that one.
And. . .
it freaking started RAINING at the end!!! God that sucked.
This is par for the course. If you look at the various stage and screen adaptations of Stoker’s overpopulated and overwrought drama, you see all sorts of compromises being made to reduce the number of characters and to brinf some narrative sense to their connections. We’ve had several versions with Harker being combined with Renfield, for instance.
Besides the ones listed (and I think Bonfire of the Vanities and Starship troopers belong in the front ranks, because they not only screwed up the story, they dumbed them down considerably, destroyed the mood, and had a completely different philosophy), I recommend:
I, Robot – disn’t even start life as an adaptation of Asimov’s book, but they bought the rights to the name, changed all the characters names to those of the book, and tried to pass it off as an adaptation
Ice Station Zebra – any similrity between the book and the movie (aside from having a sub, and an arctic base, and spies) is purely coincidental.
The Osterman Weekend – even less similarity between the book and the movie than Ice Station Zebra
from the Earth to the Moon – They took Jules Verne’s novel and changed it completely out of recognition, throwing in lots of pseudoscience to make up for it.
In Search of the Castaways – Disney’s second foray into Venbe territory, after 20,000 Leagues. You’d think that Disney and Verne was a match made in heaven, but they changed the story out of recognition. There are two Russian adaptations that are supposed to be very faithful. Maybe I’ll get to see them one day (Odd trivia note – there’s actually a character in common between 20,000 Leagues and In Search, but they didn’t capitalize on this in the Disney adaptations)
Mary poppins – J haven’t read the Poppins books, although my sister has. From all accounts, they’re very different beasts, and P.l. Travers herself didn’t much care for the Disney version.
The Odessa file – After *the Day of the Jackal * came out, I was hoping for a good adaptation of Forsyth’s next bestseller, and imagined how I’d film it. They managed some of it (and kept the twist in, thank Og), but they changed too much.
The Client – My feeling is that the studio lawyers got hold of the screenplay, and didn’t want the lawyers to look too bad, so they screwed with the plot and changed the ending out of recognition.
The Puppet Masters – there was some good stuff in this, but theu made some abysmal choices. For cryin’ out loud, just film it straight, without trying to change it to a present-day story.
I have to disagree with some other suggestions – I overall liked Dune (both versions), which were much more faithful that what would have happened if some other folks had been allowed to film them. I think several versions of Tarzan had some good points, particularlythe original silent Elmo Lincoln version (which is surprisingly faithful), the Christopher Lambert Greystoke (ditto), and even the Disney version, despite its many changes and shortcomings. They’re still all closer to Burroughs’ conception than the Weisssmuller movies.
Also, I agree that doing Hunchback was a weird choice for Disney – I’m convinced they only did it so they could show off their computer graphics software for the crowd scenes (which WERE gorgeous, and brought tears to my eyes). But you have to know Disney would have Quasimodo survive at the end (at least he didn’t end up with Esmeralda) – but Disney sure wasn’t the first to do that – the Charles Laughton version did it, too. For that matter, I’m not familiar with ANY movie version that ends the story the same way the Victor Hugo book ends.
Still not sure if the OP wants to decry adaptations which turned out to be horrible movies, or those which turned out to be horrible adaptations per se (even if they were otherwise good or even great films). For example, I watched the recent adaptation of Count of Monte Cristo last night, and while it strays pretty far from the source material (which would probably require a miniseries approach to do justice), I at least think it is an entertaining film anyway.
This one definitely works both ways: A Wizard of Earthsea.
Slapstick (Of Another Kind). I’ve never seen it, but everything I’ve ever read about it indicates that it’s absolutely awful.
I think Albert Finney was terribly miscast as Kilgore Trout in Breakfast of Champions.
Not the first time Hollywood screwed up a piece of satiric literature by turning it over to Jerry Lewis. Gore Vidal must have practically exploded when they announced that thier adaptation of his TV-play-turned-Broadway-hit Visit to a Small Planet would not star Alec Guinness (as was tossed about), or Cyril Reitchard (who starred in the TV play and the Broadway incarnation), but — Jerry Lewis
It was an appalling mess, and completelt ruinbed the thing, turning commentaryt into inept slapstick and spilling the ending early.
I’m an admirer of Vidal’s, and yes, he was appalled–but when I saw the Jerry Lewis movie in the 1950s as a small child, I loved it.
I was a pretty dopey child.
My original thought was movies that stray so far from the original plot that if the names were changed in the movie, it’s possible that someone wouldn’t realize it had been based on the book. But by all means, take it as you will.
That said, and looking at Running Man as a standalone movie, I don’t guess it sucked that bad. I was just incredibly disappointed that it didn’t follow the book later and that has biased my opinion.
re: Starship Fucking Troopers. Yep.
The first book about the character “Aloysius Xingú Leng Pendergast” was Relic, by Preston and Child, and the movie made from the book had the same title and plotline but totally deleted the main character from the book!