Does Anyone Remember When The Nanny...
ChatterBank0 min ago
Books made into films
13 Answers
Myself and my friend sometimes clash, because she normally says, if you've read the book, you can't see the film, I disagree because I read all the Harry Potter Books and feel that the films have done them a fair bit of justice. Sometimes, its hard to do it the other way, like I saw the Golden Compass at the cinema, and then my husband bought me the books, bit scared of reading them just in case I get confused....opinions on this subject?
Answers
1 to 13 of 13
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by nuttymum. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I'm not a great cinema goer but usually catch up with films of books when they are shown on television. Never read HP or LOTR so can't comment .Not my cup of tea.
I would rather read the book then see the film because it interests me to see how they have adapted the written word into film .An adaption that was practically word for word was the television production of Brideshead Revisited The characters leapt out as they did in the book. Laurence Olivier was the perfect Lord Marchmain and BR is favourite book of mine .They are now making a film of it but deviating from the original and there has been a hue and cry about in the papers !
This is one film that I shall make an effort to go and see at the cinema just to see what the fuss is about !
I would rather read the book then see the film because it interests me to see how they have adapted the written word into film .An adaption that was practically word for word was the television production of Brideshead Revisited The characters leapt out as they did in the book. Laurence Olivier was the perfect Lord Marchmain and BR is favourite book of mine .They are now making a film of it but deviating from the original and there has been a hue and cry about in the papers !
This is one film that I shall make an effort to go and see at the cinema just to see what the fuss is about !
I think it's important to try to separate the two when discussing them. They are two completely different art forms and it's like comparing a painting with a piece of music.
I'm a devotee of the book Great Expectations. I have never yet seen a dramatisation that depicts the book perfectly. The best, as a film, was David Lean's 1936 production with John Mills, but it takes a lot of liberties with the narrative. It's great piece of film for that, though.
A TV dramatisation in 1981 was better, in those terms, although it still lacked what are, to me, some crucial parts of the story. The 1998 version kept much more of the narrative, but the direction lacked something.
I'm a devotee of the book Great Expectations. I have never yet seen a dramatisation that depicts the book perfectly. The best, as a film, was David Lean's 1936 production with John Mills, but it takes a lot of liberties with the narrative. It's great piece of film for that, though.
A TV dramatisation in 1981 was better, in those terms, although it still lacked what are, to me, some crucial parts of the story. The 1998 version kept much more of the narrative, but the direction lacked something.
A film can rarely match a book. The time limitation alone precludes a film from including all the information contained in a book. Additionally, when we read, we use our own imagination. How many times have you read a book and conjured the characters and locations up in your mind - and then gone to see the film only to find people you would never have cast playing the main roles - in places totally at odds with those you'd imagined?
Having said that, seeing a film wouldn't stop me from reading the book. You'll always find so much more in a book.
Having said that, seeing a film wouldn't stop me from reading the book. You'll always find so much more in a book.
You might as well read "His Dark Materials" as they are highly unlikely to make the rest of the trilogy because the film did comparatively poorly at the US Box office due to campaigning by various Christian groups.
I actually thought "Golden Compass" was quite a good adaptation, and the decision to cut the story short before the book's monumental cliffhanger made sense to me (and, as it turns out, has worked out quite well for film-goers - who would be pretty annoyed if the film had ended the same way as the book).
I personally prefer the HP films to the books, as they cut out a lot of the padding. Hopefully the final film will excise all that interminable wandering around in the woods.
Mind you, my views may be prejudiced as I read quite a lot of books, so tend only to remember whether I liked the book or not and the main plot (if that!). A lot of people seem to remember every last detail of the books they have read. and get upset about the slightest change; I'm lucky to remember what happened at the end - quite handy, as I can sometimes still be surprised.
I generally look forward to films based on books I enjoyed - can't wait for "Watchmen" and the TV adaptations of "Preacher" and "A Song of Ice and Fire". I wouldn't read the book that a film I was interested in just before seeing the film though (as it would spoil the film), but I might well after, if I enjoyed the film..
I actually thought "Golden Compass" was quite a good adaptation, and the decision to cut the story short before the book's monumental cliffhanger made sense to me (and, as it turns out, has worked out quite well for film-goers - who would be pretty annoyed if the film had ended the same way as the book).
I personally prefer the HP films to the books, as they cut out a lot of the padding. Hopefully the final film will excise all that interminable wandering around in the woods.
Mind you, my views may be prejudiced as I read quite a lot of books, so tend only to remember whether I liked the book or not and the main plot (if that!). A lot of people seem to remember every last detail of the books they have read. and get upset about the slightest change; I'm lucky to remember what happened at the end - quite handy, as I can sometimes still be surprised.
I generally look forward to films based on books I enjoyed - can't wait for "Watchmen" and the TV adaptations of "Preacher" and "A Song of Ice and Fire". I wouldn't read the book that a film I was interested in just before seeing the film though (as it would spoil the film), but I might well after, if I enjoyed the film..
I agree with you, Nuttymum, if you have read the book there is nothing to stop you seeing the film, although as the others say it will rarely match the book. "The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe" was brilliant, but nothing like I imagined Narnia to be.
Can wait until they make a film of Chatterbank. Would we all play ourselves in it.
Can wait until they make a film of Chatterbank. Would we all play ourselves in it.
I agree with the other posts which say that a film rarely does the book justice. LOTRs was an excellent adaptation, though even those did take some liberties, but I would say that it is the best film of a book I've seen. I love the Harry Potter books, but I really don't like the films that much, and in fact some of them only make sense when you've read the books. I watched the film 'A Town Like Alice' and was really, really enjoying it when it ended halfway through the story! Yes, I suppose it was a good ending to a film, but watching the film you'd wonder why it has the title it has as it's only in the second half of the book you find out why!
Most film scripts are pretty inane, and when you read the book of a film it can be like reading something written by a twelve-year-old. For example, the book of the film '2001' is simply appalling in this respect.
On the other hand, film-makers can do some amazing things by basing their creation on some fairly mundane book. 'The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly' is an outstanding example. I was bored rigid at school by Shakespeare's 'Macbeth', but I thought Polanski's film was fantastic. Though having to keep to the script, his visual interpretation made it an unforgettable experience.
But there are sorry film failures too, like 'Catch 22', or 'Kim', with Peter O'Toole (a favourite book, but a disasterous film) .
Film to book, or book to film, there are just no certainties as to which you'll enjoy more.
On the other hand, film-makers can do some amazing things by basing their creation on some fairly mundane book. 'The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly' is an outstanding example. I was bored rigid at school by Shakespeare's 'Macbeth', but I thought Polanski's film was fantastic. Though having to keep to the script, his visual interpretation made it an unforgettable experience.
But there are sorry film failures too, like 'Catch 22', or 'Kim', with Peter O'Toole (a favourite book, but a disasterous film) .
Film to book, or book to film, there are just no certainties as to which you'll enjoy more.
I agree with tigger LOTR wre good films and books!!
The harry potter films are a pile of poo!!
The golden compass film they messed up - not one scene with a topless Daniel Craig!! wtf lol sorry back to the question I didnt like the film of it much I enjoyed the book more.
I normally do like books more then films because most films are just made to make as much money as they can and the author just has to stand by and watch as they ruin their work!!
The harry potter films are a pile of poo!!
The golden compass film they messed up - not one scene with a topless Daniel Craig!! wtf lol sorry back to the question I didnt like the film of it much I enjoyed the book more.
I normally do like books more then films because most films are just made to make as much money as they can and the author just has to stand by and watch as they ruin their work!!
1 to 13 of 13
