Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Entertainment Discussions > Movie Talk
Reload this Page >

What are the best adaptations that are quite UNfaithful to the source material?

Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters

What are the best adaptations that are quite UNfaithful to the source material?

Old 05-18-04, 02:30 PM
  #26  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Who Framed Roger Rabbit credits the novel Who Censored Roger Rabbit by Gary Wolf, but actually has very little in common with it besides the names of the lead characters.
Old 05-18-04, 02:58 PM
  #27  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Times Square
Posts: 12,135
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
The 1951 THE THING (From Another World) is one of my favorite sci-fi movies, but it really has little to do with the John Campbell story Who Goes There. John Carpenter was much more faithful to the story in his remake.

Last edited by marty888; 05-18-04 at 03:01 PM.
Old 05-18-04, 03:10 PM
  #28  
Moderator
 
wendersfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: America!
Posts: 33,922
Received 164 Likes on 120 Posts
The American Friend, adapted from Ripley's Game by Patricia Highsmith

The Shining, adapted from King's novel. Actually, in this instance I don't think the film is that unfaithful, it's just that King fans were so irate about any changes that they actually bitched about Kubrick changing a hotel room number...
Old 05-19-04, 01:15 AM
  #29  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Sitting on a beach, earning 20%
Posts: 9,917
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally posted by wendersfan

The Shining, adapted from King's novel. Actually, in this instance I don't think the film is that unfaithful, it's just that King fans were so irate about any changes that they actually bitched about Kubrick changing a hotel room number...
They know why it was changed, right?

Ah well, it could have been worse. Could have been 30 seconds long. With bunnies.
Old 05-19-04, 01:58 AM
  #30  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 8,466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Mr. Salty
All of the movies so far have at least a passing resemblance to their source material.

For a complete departure, have a look at "Exit to Eden."

The novel by Anne Rice, writing as Anne Rampling, is erotic, near hardcore pornography, loaded with S&M and every kink imaginable.

The movie is a lightweight comedy with Dan Ayckroyd and Rosie O'Donnell as a couple of undercover cops.
Don't remind me.
Old 05-19-04, 03:20 AM
  #31  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
UAIOE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: LV-426
Posts: 6,598
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by Mr. Salty
All of the movies so far have at least a passing resemblance to their source material.

For a complete departure, have a look at "Exit to Eden."

The novel by Anne Rice, writing as Anne Rampling, is erotic, near hardcore pornography, loaded with S&M and every kink imaginable.

The movie is a lightweight comedy with Dan Ayckroyd and Rosie O'Donnell as a couple of undercover cops.

I always had a feeling those two were tacked on.

Which brings up the most important question: Why bother making the movie if you are just going to turn it into something with lame-o comic bits added in?

for O'Donnel in this movie

for Dana Delany. Never had much going for her except for in this movie
Old 05-19-04, 06:28 AM
  #32  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
Michael Corvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 62,040
Received 736 Likes on 519 Posts
Originally posted by UAIOE
"The Lost World" (JP 2)

The movie is alright but is a mess when compared to the book.
That is because Speilberg went into production before Crichton was done writing the book. Wrote the screenplay entirely seperate from the book. When the book was done, SS skimmed it for the best ideas and only took one. The trailers over the cliff.

My votes go to:
The Shining
The Lawnmower Man
Old 05-19-04, 07:57 AM
  #33  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 23,201
Received 155 Likes on 118 Posts
Absolute Power

They totally jettisoned the main character from the novel and made it focus on a secondary character to give Clint Eastwood a bigger role. Wouldn't call it a good adaptation, but was quite unfaithful.


A Time To Kill is probably the best commercial fiction to change some elements of the book. They did a lot of things to keep it upbeat for the audience.
Spoiler:
The dog survived, as did the informant "Mickey Mouse."
Old 05-19-04, 07:58 AM
  #34  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Daytona Beach, FL
Posts: 23,201
Received 155 Likes on 118 Posts
While I haven't completely read the book, I heard Witches of Eastwick made some changes for the better.
Old 05-19-04, 08:57 AM
  #35  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Cusm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 7,680
Received 31 Likes on 21 Posts
Sum of All Fears, along with the rest of Clancy's books, but this may be the worse.
Old 05-20-04, 01:14 AM
  #36  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
UAIOE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: LV-426
Posts: 6,598
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by Michael Corvin
That is because Speilberg went into production before Crichton was done writing the book. Wrote the screenplay entirely seperate from the book. When the book was done, SS skimmed it for the best ideas and only took one. The trailers over the cliff.
That explains why it sucks compared to the book...

except for the trailers over the cliff scene...good stuff.
Old 05-20-04, 09:14 AM
  #37  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by DonnachaOne
I'd still say that was a fairly close adaptation. I can understand the lack of Gods.
I didn't have a problem with the absence of the gods, but I slapped my forehead pretty hard at what happened with Agamemnon (being vague; don't know spoiler tags). Still, like I said, liked the film anyway.

As for The Witches of Eastwick, I like the movie but think it was a big mistake moving the time period to the present.
Old 05-20-04, 12:32 PM
  #38  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Lower Appalachia
Posts: 2,908
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
The Long Goodbye directed by Robert Altman is I believe the only filming of this Raymond Chandler book, and changes the era (from post WWII to the 1970's) and the ending, which is a very important change, revising the entire moral tone of the book. Elliot Gould as Phillip Marlowe at first blush didn't seem to be in the same mold as Bogart, Dick Powell, Robert Montgomery, or James Garner, who had played the character before. Yet, it is still very true to the spirit of the book even with the changes.
Old 05-20-04, 01:54 PM
  #39  
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 754
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by wendersfan
[B]
The Shining, adapted from King's novel. Actually, in this instance I don't think the film is that unfaithful, it's just that King fans were so irate about any changes that they actually bitched about Kubrick changing a hotel room number...
I disagree. I don't like to defend fanboys of anything but I think the contention amoug the adaptation comes from King himself. The point of the book, according to King, was that this hotel drives a good, sane man to insanity whereas the film basically has Jack being insane from the getgo and the hotel doesn't do much except provide wierdness. King's version is a character study whereas the film is just a horror flic.
Old 05-20-04, 02:26 PM
  #40  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Numanoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Down in 'The Park'
Posts: 27,881
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
The original Frankenstein.
Old 05-20-04, 02:48 PM
  #41  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: IL
Posts: 3,509
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by Verbal Gorilla
I disagree. I don't like to defend fanboys of anything but I think the contention amoug the adaptation comes from King himself. The point of the book, according to King, was that this hotel drives a good, sane man to insanity whereas the film basically has Jack being insane from the getgo and the hotel doesn't do much except provide wierdness. King's version is a character study whereas the film is just a horror flic.
I agree. Which is the reason I greatly prefer the TV miniseries to the movie. Blasphemy, I know. But that's what I think.
Old 05-20-04, 03:21 PM
  #42  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East County
Posts: 34,903
Received 158 Likes on 131 Posts
Originally posted by Cusm
Sum of All Fears, along with the rest of Clancy's books, but this may be the worse.
Patriot Games, Clear and Present Danger, and Sum of All Fears were butchered when they were adapted, but The Hunt for Red October was a pretty good adaptation of the book.
Old 05-20-04, 03:47 PM
  #43  
DVD Talk Godfather
 
Michael Corvin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 62,040
Received 736 Likes on 519 Posts
Originally posted by Morf
I agree. Which is the reason I greatly prefer the TV miniseries to the movie. Blasphemy, I know. But that's what I think.
Same here. In the book all the characters are normal people at the beginning and it is a slow transformation that is caused by the hotel to these people, that makes it far superior.

Kubrick made it a horror film from frame one. It was never about characters in extreme circumstances.
Old 05-20-04, 03:57 PM
  #44  
Moderator
 
wendersfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: America!
Posts: 33,922
Received 164 Likes on 120 Posts
Originally posted by Morf
I agree. Which is the reason I greatly prefer the TV miniseries to the movie. Blasphemy, I know. But that's what I think.
See, I think Kubrick took a mediocre novel and turned it into a great film.
Old 05-20-04, 04:39 PM
  #45  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
UAIOE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: LV-426
Posts: 6,598
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally posted by Numanoid
The original Frankenstein.
Unfaithful, but for the better.

I remember reading the orginal book.

i remember it being extremely boring and the words "sublime" and "melancholy" were used far too many times.

Normally i would have accounted hating this book because i had to read it in a High School class, however i also had to read "Brave New World" and "Fahrenheit 451" and i enjoyed those books alot.
Old 05-20-04, 10:04 PM
  #46  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Hokeyboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Posts: 20,256
Received 593 Likes on 367 Posts
Originally posted by wendersfan
See, I think Kubrick took a mediocre novel and turned it into a great film.
Old 05-21-04, 12:08 PM
  #47  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Meglos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 5,407
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
The Spy Who Loved Me
Old 11-21-06, 08:54 PM
  #48  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 6,410
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by CreatureX
The Wizard of Oz
What were some of the major differences between the original story and the 1939 film?
Old 11-22-06, 01:32 AM
  #49  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Heat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Central Illinois
Posts: 16,702
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Fletch

Great book (won the Edgar Award among writers when it came out), and was made into the movie . The two have the same basic plot but are pretty different, and are both great.
Old 11-22-06, 02:32 AM
  #50  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: H-Town, TX
Posts: 3,662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Buttmunker
What were some of the major differences between the original story and the 1939 film?
Well for starters, I don't think she dreamed her trip to Oz in the book. It's been over 20 years since I read it, but I'm pretty sure it actually happens.

Return to Oz was much more accurate in tone then The Wizard of Oz when compared to the books. It would be interesting to see if any studio ever decides to take a crack at faithful adaptations of the Oz series now that Lord of the Rings and Chronic-what-cles of Narnia have both been successful.

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.