2 ms·
> Honestly, i hate it when book SciFi gets put into movie shape. Its rarely looks like i imagined it. Well, that problem is hardly specific to SciFi. If you re
by krylon 10y ago
> Honestly, i hate it when book SciFi gets put into movie shape. Its rarely looks like i imagined it.
Well, that problem is hardly specific to SciFi. If you read a book first, then watch the movie adaptation, the result is nearly always disappointing.
In fact, the only counter-examples I can think of right now are Inherent Vice and No Country For Old Men.
- aedron 10y agoI think the arch-challenge, Lord of the Rings, went pretty well all things considered (the first three, I don't even rate the latter movies).
- egjerlow 10y agoGotta respectfully disagree with you here. I sincerely regret watching the LoTR movies, as reading the books now is impossible without imagining the specific actors in the movie (Wood's whiny interpretation of Frodo is especially bad). Before I watched the movies, I had my own image of these characters and they were so much more nebulous, vivid, alive, mysterious, majestic, etc.. I mean, surfing on an oliphant? Geez. Also the way they butchered the relationship between Frodo and Sam I thought was atrocious. Not saying there were no good things about it, but again, would have elected to not see it if I had the choice again.
- kjdal2001 10y agoI haven't seen Inherent Vice, but I totally agree about No Country for Old Men. One of the differences there might be that both of those movies were made by very accomplished directors, Paul Thomas Anderson and the Coen brothers respectively. They might have the confidence to put their own interpretation of the story into their movie that lesser known directors dont feel comfortable doing.