Why is that a relevant measuring stick? Doesn’t it only matter if the film is worthwhile (however you may define that)? And why would that be defined by its cl

Why is that a relevant measuring stick? Doesn’t it only matter if the film is worthwhile (however you may define that)? And why would that be defined by its closeness to the short story? That should be wholly irrelevant. If you know something that is adapted in a movie then you might want certain ideas/words/characters/etc. to make it into the movie because you thought them to be quite worthwhile … but if you don’t know it? I’m strongly in favor of viewing adaptions wholly independently from the source material. (Even if you like ideas/words/characters/etc. in the source material and those didn’t make it to the adaption. Oh well, then you can only hope for something else to pick those up. But that in itself is not a reason to dislike the adaption. The lone exception to this I can see is incoherent adaption, but incoherentness is usually something negative irrespective of whether something is adapted or not.) That said, the central idea of the short story, the crux of the story, was very successfully adapted with this movie. I think that was excellently pulled off.