Woke has nothing to do with it (but if it did, I might have liked the adaptation more).
This would still be my choice. It’s clearly based on the Asimov stories, it has all of key elements of the stories. Only it does the one thing Asimov explicitly said he would never do and didn’t believe in as a plotline: namely the “robots rebel and attack their creators” trope. So for that reason it’s my worse adaptation.
World War Z is definitely up there too. Took a story that (very unusually for American scifi) was fundamentally about different bits of the world that weren’t the usual “America plus maybe a shot of big ben and the Eiffle tower”, and made it how a heroic American Brad Pitt saves the world from zombies. And it was truly God awful as a movie too.
The three-movie adaptation of The Hobbit. Massive deviations from the original story, with superfluous new characters and sub-plots introduced, apparently in an effort to make the story a more direct prequel to The Lord of the Rings.
The films transformed a fun, interesting book that was originally a children’s book, into a series that was 70% action (many of which involved combats, and characters, not in the book at all), and 30% slapstick humor.
This 
We love the LOTR trilogy but they milked The Hobbit for all they could, and not in a good way. It should’ve been one movie.
Jackson had wanted to do two films, but the powers that be insisted on three. That explains the padding. And the initial scenes in the Shire are excellent, and so is the White Council vs The Necromancer. Some of the voice acting is superb. The battle scenes were stupid, the barrel race/battle was stupid, and the elf/dwarf love scene was stupid.
You just have to learn to enjoy the good bits. I know we expected another LotR, possible the greatest movie trilogy of all time, and we were disappointed.
Two.
Two would’ve been a huge improvement as long as they weren’t just padded out to 3.5 hours. Maybe they can do a “director’s cut” and condense it and get rid of the all the extraneous stupid shit (yes, most of the battle scenes).
There are fan edits which do exactly that.
Well, my i8mmediate choice, Starship Troopers, has predicatably been mentioned about six times already, so here are a few others:
Just about every adaptation of books by Jules Verne. Even the ones that are pretty good take significant liberties with the source material. The good ones include:
Around the World in 80 Days (Although they added the balloon trip, which is now so associated with the story that every other adaptation – including the PBS one the OP mentions – has to include a balloon. And it’s on the cover of most copies of the book
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea – Disney did a surprisingly good job on this, but it’s still not Verne’s book
The Mysterious Island – It’s a great showcase for Harryhausen’s special effects, and some of it is faithful to the book. But there’s a vast gulf between the book and the film
Journey to the Center of the Earth – the film survives the addition of Thayer David as a competitor (!), Arlene Dahl as the token woman, and even Pat Boone, because it was written surprisingly well, and because of the awesome James Mason, saving another 1950s Verne adaptation.
The Weapon of Destruction (AKA “The FAbulous World of Jules Verne”) and The Stolen Airship – mostly because of Karel Zeman’s gifted filmmaking.
Bad:
From the Earth to the Moon, Valley of Dragons (based on Off on a Comet), Master of the World, The more recent Journey t the CEnter of the Earth and Mysterious Island and all the other Around the World in 80 days, The Light at the End of the World, and most other adaptations.
Also just about any adaptation of the works of H.G. Wells. Most of them pretty much miss the point Wells was trying to make. Though I like them, they’re terrible adaptations:
BAD
The Food of the Gods
The Island of Doctor Moreau (all adaptations, including The Island of Lost Souls)
The War of the Worlds (all versions)
The Time Machine (all versions)
Even Wells’ own Things to Come is pretty awful, all things considered
What’s good? The Man Who Could Work Miracles is probably the best. I have a soft spot for The Invisible Man, even though it takes great liberties (and is mixed with Philip Wylie’s The Murderer Invisible). There were some decent TV adaptations of some of Well’ shorter works.
Anything by Edgar Allen Poe
There are almost all unfaithful and pretty luridly bad, especially the Roger Corman films. There are various “arty” adaptations, but they don’t evoke the feel of Poe’s original works.
H.P. Lovecraft
Until recently, all Lovecraft adaptations were pretty awful – Die, Monster Die, The Haunted Palace, both versions of The Dunwich Horror. During the 1980s there was a run of super-gory Lovecraft films – From Beyond, Re-Animator, etc.
It’s only recently that films have been made with an attempt to be faithful – The Call of Cthulhu, The Whisperer in Darkness, The Colour out of Space. Dagon was at least halfway decent in adapting, not “Dagon”, but “THe Shadow over Innsmouth” , although with far too much blood and guts.
Yeah definitely a contender, it’s like they took the few bits of the LOTR that sucked (e.g. the skateboarding elf) and make an entire trilogy of just those parts.
The book was specifically patterned off of “The Good War” by Studs Turkel. A true masterpiece that everyone should read. My only gripe with “World War Z” is if it were to be a true parallel to the other work it should be a similar size. “The Good War” was twice as long and touched on every aspect of the war.
Or as I heard it put (on honest trailers IIRC) “Watch the movie adaptation of World War Z it has everything you loved about the title of the bestselling book”
Yeah I don’t think I Am legend counts for that reason. The first two acts, although different to the book are really good and do a decent job of representing the ideas of the book. It’s only the last act where it completely goes off the rails and utterly abandons like the whole point of the book (even the title makes no sense)
Third (or fourth) the nomination.
None of the Lovecraftian adaptations that I am familiar with provide any sort of truly epic feel about them, a sense that the human characters are mere pawns in a huge mad cosmic game of dire insanity, with all the lore, fantastical settings, and yes psychological horror that you should expect.
As you indicated much more often they are simply excuses for cheap gore effects and lame jump scares and such, tho at least the likes of Re-Animator were funny. Apparently the Cthulhu film was a small-budget affair, and the Colour (Colori-ized for us Yanks) part of a Stillborn Franchise that never materialized. For some odd reason no major studio seems interested in springing for such an adaptation.
James Mason was perfect.
Close enough, IMHO.
Cast a deadly Spell. Not a direct adaptation, but still good.
Yeah as a body of work Lovecraft’s has to be the worst set of adaptions, especially relative to how influential the books were. The adaptations are universally dire (although IIRC there was a Guillermo De Toro movie in the works that was cancelled but could have changed that)
If was so inclined I might say it was karmic retribution for Lovecraft being such a terrible racist arsehole 
Nah, far from the worst. Would be a good (and fairly faithful) adaptation if it were edited down.
I haven’t seen either the musical or the movie, but from what I’ve heard, this is definitely a contender.
He apparently renounced his former views soon before his death, or at least mellowed out on a lot of them.
Specifically, it was a black-and-white silent film with period-era production values, presented as the movie that might have been made in 1927 when the short story was first published.
I was too outraged by what that selfish bitch did to her cat to CARE if she got a happy ending she didn’t deserve.
As for my own nomination (I’m limiting myself to cases where I’m personally familiar with both source and adaptation), I’ll go with Christine. OK, character names and the overall plot actually followed the book, but aside from the merging of the LeBay brothers, Arnie was pretty psycho from the beginning (which he really wasn’t as King wrote him) and both Dennis and Leigh apparently lost 50+ IQ points each in the transition from book to movie. Other distortions of character personalities and apparent intelligence weren’t quite so bad, but when all four/five of the most significant characters suffered such drastic mangling, the whole thing left me wondering if anyone involved in the movie had actually READ the book.