Man, these book-movie comparisons always annoy the hell out of me. If a painter paints a cliff-side seascape, and a dozen years later a sculptor sculpts the pa

Man, these book-movie comparisons always annoy the hell out of me. If a painter paints a cliff-side seascape, and a dozen years later a sculptor sculpts the painting as a bas-relief, you don't judge the sculptor because his sculpture didn't measure up to the painting. He's not a painter. He didn't paint a picture, he made a sculpture. It's the same subject, even the same perspective, but they are two completely independent works of art made by two separate artists. The fact that the cliff was in both works is inconsequential because the works stand by themselves. The same goes for novel-film "adaptations". It's a different work, produced by a different artist, and involves a completely different process to accomplish. They aren't supposed to be the same. They can't be the same. If you like the novel, enjoy the novel. If you like the movie, like the movie. If you don't, that's fine too. But stop comparing them, please.