Book based movies that never got it right.

[Barack Clinton]

 Several books have been made into movies several times, and in some cases the movies never get the book right.

I can think of several examples. One that stands out to me is "The time machine" by H.G. Wells.

In TTM, Wells, who was a brilliant man and one of extreme social conscience, wrote a story about how the class system would, if not controlled, eventuall lead the human race to split into two species. The working classes, living under hard, harsh and hopeless conditions would become more brutal and inhuman, while the upper classes would degenerate into ignorant, all but mindless things much like domesticated house pets.

Well, so far there've been 2 films and one made for tv movie, and in each case the story was rewritten to make the bifurcation  of the human race into the morlocks and the eloi the result of something else. The classic george pal movie made it a nuclear war, the last movie made it the result of the moon being destroyed and causing massive disasters on earth.

But still, all adaptations of TTM have avoided the essential plot of the book that was excessive class separation in society could eventual lead to two almost totally different strains of humanity, and at times I swear I can see it happening today. You look at the street gangs from the poverty saturated neighborhoods and their brutality, their hopelessness and their almost complete contempt for human life, then you look at the rich, hollywood, beverly hills types as personified by paris hilton and such, and you can  see the seeds of  the morlocks and the eloi being planted today.

The adaptations of TTM avoided Wells' original plot because they feared being accused of "Socialism", but I wish someone had had the guts to do a goo, accurate adaptation of it, hell, even the SFC could do a more faithful adaptation then the mainstream movie makers have done.

Now name a book that's never been made into a movie accurately.

[Barack Clinton]

Oh, yeah, starship troopers is another sure fire member of this list....

[indianasmith]

Most of Stephen King's stuff . . . .

[Doggett]

I am legend.

[Mr. DS]

The Lightning Thief...they took a great book that could have been an awesome movie and bent it over.  They then proceeded to have their way with it and toss it on the curb bloody and battered. 

[Hammock Rider]

WANTED. It was a great, fun, riotous graphic novel and they completely ruined it with the "Loom of Fate' garbage and by cutting out the super-heroics and villany. As Charlie Brown would say" Good Grief!"

[Olivia Bauer]

The DaVinci Code series: None of the characters fit the physical description of the characters in the book and they censored the Muslim rapist character in "Angel's & Demons" by making him a white atheist wearing glasses. WHAT?!

Eragon: Everything is wrong. No further comment.

[Doggett]

The Lost World: Jurassic Park


Did they even read the book ??? 

[Flick James]

Most of Stephen King's stuff . . . .

Good call. Stephen King just doesn't translate well to the screen.

Anybody who has read It knows damn well it's not even possible to reproduce it on celluloid in any way that makes sense, so instead of what It really was we get just a giant spider (big whoop). Granted it was a t.v. miniseries, but still.  Also, some of the darker themes and scenes just couldn't make their way into a screenplay without it becoming an NC-17. But Tim Curry was good as Pennywise.

Tommyknockers, oh my God. No commentary necessary.

The Mist. That movie really p**sed me off. First, the horrible CGI was bad enough. Then the ending. What the f**k were they trying to do? The book ends ambiguously, with the ones who escaped heading off into the mist listening to radio transmissions from the real world giving them hope but with no idea what direction they're heading or if they ever get out alive. What was wrong with that? Instead we get that bulls**t ending with the guy killing everyone including his own son to give them a quick death, followed by him being rescued and living with it. It p**sed me off because it came across to me as an attempt to give the film more closure with a cop out excuse of making it more edgy. Keeping the ending as it was would have at least made the entire thing a little more watchable because the developement wasn't terrible despite the bad CGI. As it ended I just wanted to throw something hard at the director.

[JPickettIII]

Most of Stephen King's stuff . . . .

Good call. Stephen King just doesn't translate well to the screen.

The Mist. That movie really p**sed me off. First, the horrible CGI was bad enough. Then the ending. What the f**k were they trying to do? The book ends ambiguously, with the ones who escaped heading off into the mist listening to radio transmissions from the real world giving them hope but with no idea what direction they're heading or if they ever get out alive. What was wrong with that? Instead we get that bulls**t ending with the guy killing everyone including his own son to give them a quick death, followed by him being rescued and living with it. It p**sed me off because it came across to me as an attempt to give the film more closure with a cop out excuse of making it more edgy. Keeping the ending as it was would have at least made the entire thing a little more watchable because the developement wasn't terrible despite the bad CGI. As it ended I just wanted to throw something hard at the director.

I saw the movie.  I liked it right to the end.  I was a little bummed that Thomas Jane killed his son.  Now I am really irritated since the book ended differently.  I could not imagine the guilt he had after killing his son and then the mist goes away.  I did like the monsters though.  The Spiders were cool.  The movie (and I am sure the book is too) is a great example of group think and people looking for a leader.  The preacher woman was one messed up cookie.

Later,

John

[Flick James]

Most of Stephen King's stuff . . . .

Good call. Stephen King just doesn't translate well to the screen.

The Mist. That movie really p**sed me off. First, the horrible CGI was bad enough. Then the ending. What the f**k were they trying to do? The book ends ambiguously, with the ones who escaped heading off into the mist listening to radio transmissions from the real world giving them hope but with no idea what direction they're heading or if they ever get out alive. What was wrong with that? Instead we get that bulls**t ending with the guy killing everyone including his own son to give them a quick death, followed by him being rescued and living with it. It p**sed me off because it came across to me as an attempt to give the film more closure with a cop out excuse of making it more edgy. Keeping the ending as it was would have at least made the entire thing a little more watchable because the developement wasn't terrible despite the bad CGI. As it ended I just wanted to throw something hard at the director.

I saw the movie.  I liked it right to the end.  I was a little bummed that Thomas Jane killed his son.  Now I am really irritated since the book ended differently.  I could not imagine the guilt he had after killing his son and then the mist goes away.  I did like the monsters though.  The Spiders were cool.  The movie (and I am sure the book is too) is a great example of group think and people looking for a leader.  The preacher woman was one messed up cookie.

Later,

John

I liked the development too, I just didn't like some of the CGI elements. They looked very CGI. But yeah, that ending was a big mistake and I think the movie would have sustained a bit better if they hadn't ruined it like that.

[Chainsawmidget]

I thought the Mist had a  great ending just because it was so much the exact opposite of anything you would have suspected. 

I did read the story first.  Honestly neither were bad.  They were both good in their own way.  Now while some of the Cg was a bit hokey, I loved that giant behemoth thingy. 

[Mr. DS]

The main Steven King stinker for me was Cujo.  Storywise there was no way that film was going to translate well anyhow.  Mom and son hang out in a car for a long time.  Not my idea of entertainment. 

[JPickettIII]

One movie that I though wa s dissapointment is the Way of the Peaceful Warror.  Loved the book but hated the movie.  I bought the movie thinking it would be good.  Big mistake.

Later,

John

[Nightowl]

The Running Man by Stephen King. The book is so different from the movie in so many ways and even though I enjoy the movie I'll take the book.