This is where my question about the delta comes in. All of these (as well as LOTR) are great books and great films.
What’s rare is something like the Godfather where a shit book becomes a great movie.
1 Like
The omission of The Scouring of the Shire is an almost unforgiveable offense. Almost.
1 Like
I wouldn’t say the book is shit, but the film is definitely better. You could say the same for The Maltese Falcon, Dr. Strangelove, and No Way Out.
Don’t need entire pages devoted to the size of Sonny’s cock.
Another good book/good movie, Being There
Knew it would be fun to throw a LOTR stone into the pond.
For my part, I enjoyed the movies more than the books. I really enjoyed the books but, to be honest, I skipped over all the songs. I don’t have the same level of love for Tom Bombadil as many LOTR fans and can see how he was cut from the movies (because there’s only so much you can fit into even a 4-hour run-time). Tolkien’s world-building is incredible and I think that, overall, Jackson brought it to the screen brilliantly.
I enjoyed how the movies intercut the two stories of the split Fellowship, even though this was really the only way to go in this medium. To follow the books, and have the whole tale of one half of the Fellowship be played out and then reset and do the other half would’ve been a bold choice in the movies, and likely would not have sat well with those not familiar with the tale. It does spoil the reveal of Frodo’s survival, but I think they handled it about as well as it could be done.
As to the Scouring of the Shire, that would’ve extended the movie considerably. Maybe if it had five fewer endings…
I think I watched The Hobbit, but I don’t think I finished it. Haven’t bothered with the other two. There was a joke (from The Onion or some such) that the last chapter of Harry Potter 7 was going to be broken down into 7 separate movies. Some people thought it was real. Apparently Jackson was one of them, because that’s basically what he did to The Hobbit.
At least it’s not a whole chapter.
Worst, Dune. Best, Dune.
1 Like
I would argue that there really isn’t a delta. The adaptation has to be a great movie regardless of the quality of the source material.
To wit, Last of the Mohicans is considered a classic of American Literature, but (at least to me) it’s not a very good book. Michael Mann’s 1992 movie, however, is amazing. Fun fact, that was the first film he directed after Miami Vice.
1 Like
Mohican Vice.
1 Like
I’ve never even tried to read Last of the Mohicans, but despite its popularity when it was written, all I’ve ever heard about it is that it’s barely readable.
Best: +Jaws, +The Exorcist
It can politely be described as of a particular era.
WWZ worked fine, IMO, as a standalone zombie flick. it didn’t elevate the genre by any means, but it was perfectly cromulent. Compared to the book, though, it was an obvious letdown.
I think the book could work well as a limited series, each episode serving as a chapter with its own narrator/narrative.
Ooooh, Jaws is a good one. Terrible book.
1 Like
“What was your best day?”
“Same day.”
1 Like
It would cost a shitload of money. Last of Us limited itself to a couple big zombie scenes because of cost.
I read it in high school and thought it was pretty good. Definitely a different time though.
I watched Apocalypse Now and thought “holy shit, this may be the greatest movie ever”. Then I read Heart of Darkness and thought “holy shit, this may be the greatest book ever”. My tastes have since changed a bit on both, but holy shit they’re both good.
2 Likes
A friend of mine earned his English degree in part because he was able to muddle through the “Heart of Darkness” coursework as he’d seen Apocalypse Now a couple of times.
Three of my favorite movies of life are all great books:
The Hunt for Red October
Russia House
Master & Commander
Plenty of other good LeCarre adaptations, too.
Patriot Games was both good book / good movie, too. The rest of the Clancy canon I think didn’t look so good on the big screen.
2 Likes