Worst Book to Movie Transitions

[flybye023]

So a friend of my Mom's just finished the Harry Potter series. She called my mom to see if she could find some new fantasy series to read as she hadn't been much of a reader as a child. I recommended Lloyd Alexander's Prydain Chronicles which then reminded me of the worst movie interpretation I've ever run across: The Black Cauldron from Disney.

Basically Disney took the first two books of the series, The Book of Three and The Black Cauldron and combined them into a movie that was totally lacking in charm, wit, or even resemblance to the books. Totally disappointing as Lloyd Alexander writes these stories very well and they are great!

Another one I remember is The Moon Spinners. Again a Disney "interpretation" of a good book by Mary Stewart. Again, no resemblance to the book what-so-ever.

Some that were OK...Where the Red Fern Grows, Rats of Nimh, and Watership Down. Enough of the book remained to make them enjoyable.

Some that totally rocked...The Princess Bride and Harry Potter.

So, what's your Best, Average, and Worst book to movie choice?

[TruthHurts]

Let's see good ones would be Fight Club, Where The Heart Is, and Silence of the Lambs

Average: White Oleander, Practical Magic, and Pay It Forward

Bad: Less Than Zero, Flowers In The Attic, and Starship Troopers

[Knightmare]

I can't think of a horrible one right off the bat, but I can think of a good one.

Sleepers by Lorenzo Carcaterra was turned into a pretty good flick back in 1996. It followed the book almost faithfully.

Oh! The bad movie adaptation: Bonfire of the Vanities. HORRIBLE movie, great book.

[myswtghst]

IMO, Eragon was a pretty crappy book-to-movie adaptation. I'm not in the camp who thinks it is the BEST book evar, but I did enjoy it, and the movie just felt way too smushed for me. The relationship between Eragon and Jeremy Irons' character was much to rushed, and certain awesome characters were completely cut out. :p

[FuzzyKitten99]

Jurassic Park was not that great. Visually, yes. But the story lacked in depth and the characters felt shallow and undeveloped. But that is what you get when you get Spielberg as the director. All visual effects but no intellectual content. Jurassic Park was a great achievement for CGI animation and images, don't get me wrong, but there is/was so much more to the story that was left out that should have been in there.

[myswtghst]

Jurassic Park was not that great.

I agree, and as the series progressed, they just went downhill.

The first, the original JP: Awesome book, rather great movie (IMO).
The second, The LW: Pretty good book, pretty stupid movie.
The third....oh wait, there's a reason Crichton didn't write a third book. :rolleyes: It wasn't necessary, and the movie was just painfully stupid to me. Oh, aside from the pterodactyl scene, which the only reason it was awesome, while the rest of the movie sucked, is that it was taken directly from the first book.

[symposes]

Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

The original BBC production, I believe it was in the 70's. Essentually used the book as the script. And from what I understand, it did horrible. I guess its easier to read then watch.

However the more recent HGTTG movie, was rather enjoyable. The best part, is that Douglas Adams worked on it with the rest of the people involved. So it was truely in his image.

Dune. In all of its forms.

The book is great. The first movie, with Sting. Was one ill always enjoy.
The Scifi Mini-series made me want to slit my wrists to make it end. All 6 hours of it.
The second mini-series, Children of Dune, was based on Dune Messiah And Children of Dune combined. (probly 40-60) And i couldnt watch it all the way. Yes i did watch it. but i couldnt get into it.

Any in the works? Sword of Truth.
The interesting part, is that Goodkind has said, He would never give permission to have his work turned into a movie, or videogame(i know i asked). However He eventually changed his stance and has elected to do a Mini-series.
story here http://www.bettsbooks.com/ just scroll down to see the story

Course i can only think of a few good ones, Like Sincity, 300, V for Vendetta.
I hear Watchmen is getting turned into a movie. I hope they dont screw that one up.

[BEN1972]

One movie I can think of is Harmful Intent by Robin Cook. The movie had Tim Matheson as Jeffrey Rhodes. He was the only one who looked close to the character. If you've read the book, you'll know what I mean. I guess for a made-for-tv movie you can't expect much.

[NightAngel]

Most of Stephen King and Dean Koontz novels suck in their movie forms. I love both authors but there really aren't many good adaptations. Well, I liked The Stand but I never read the book either.

A co-worker of mine said that the book Forrest Gump was very different than the movie. He hates the movie but loved the book.

[FuzzyKitten99]

I agree, and as the series progressed, they just went downhill.

The first, the original JP: Awesome book, rather great movie (IMO).
The second, The LW: Pretty good book, pretty stupid movie.
The third....oh wait, there's a reason Crichton didn't write a third book. :rolleyes: It wasn't necessary, and the movie was just painfully stupid to me. Oh, aside from the pterodactyl scene, which the only reason it was awesome, while the rest of the movie sucked, is that it was taken directly from the first book.

I don't think I ever saw the third one... If I did, it wasn't worth remembering.

[myswtghst]

I don't think I ever saw the third one... If I did, it wasn't worth remembering.

And if you haven't, don't.

[Caveat Emptor]

Stephen King books obviously vary widely in their movie adaptations. Carrie, The Shining, Misery - classics. It, The Stand - mediocre. Needful Things, Pet Sematary - :puke:

I am waiting for Deathly Hallows to come as it's the only HP book I've read. I know it'll take 3 years, but anyways...

I haven't read many books that have been turned into movies *afterward*, usually the other way around.

I never realized The Black Cauldron was a book. I remember enjoying the film, but I was only 11....

[Bella_Vixen]

A co-worker of mine said that the book Forrest Gump was very different than the movie. He hates the movie but loved the book.

Movie was bad; book was worse.

[Rine]

Ella Enchanted was a great book but the movie...eh, not so great. It didn't help that they hacked out major plot points and changed the characters. I hated the movie. Which is sad because when I read the book I thought it would make a really, really great movie and I was very disappointed with the adaption.

[Killer Bees]

Generally any time they try to adapt Stephen King for the screen, they stuff it up. But I watched the adaptation of Secret Window with Johnny Depp and it was brilliant. A little different to the story, but it still stood alone in entertaining creepiness.

Children of Men was pretty much completely different from the book. Both were very well done in their own way. I watched the movie before I read the book and I kept expecting it to be at least similar. Apart from characters names and the pregnant woman issue, everything was different.

Hithhiker's Guide To The Galaxy was a mish mash of the book. I also watched the movie first. I think the movie did Zaphod Beeblebrox a lot better than the book did. And the book was quite verbose like most English comedy novels.

Still, loved them both on their own merits.

[powerboy]

And if you haven't, don't.

That is my comment right there. The first 2 were alreight, and the second, just plain sucked.

[Broomjockey]

Technically, the Bourne series is a horrible book to movie translation. If you haven't read the books, but seen the movies, the only similarity is that both star a character called Jason Bourne who starts out with no memory. First off, the lady he "kidnaps" is Canadian in the books, and they get married, and she doesn't die. He isn't even a wanted man by the end of the first book. The second one takes place in Asia! The only reason I was able to enjoy the movies at all is because there's no resemblance at all between the movies and books except for the previously mentioned name and starting condition.

[Nekojin]

The Neverending Story.

The movie is decent if you haven't read the book. I saw the movie first, then was given a copy of the book by my favorite aunt (which I no longer have, alas). The book is much better. And, more importantly, the book is much longer. Where the movie ends is about halfway through the book.

The sequel movies don't even attempt to follow the remainder of the book. They're just fanciful spinoffs.

[Hon'ya-chan]

The Transformers Movie.

This strip pretty much defines it for me: http://www.vgcats.com/comics/?strip_id=241

[cinema guy]

The Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker.

They were pretty much just using the titles by that point, but they both bear no resemblance to the books. Unlike the later For Your Eyes Only, which wove the short stories from the book into a thoroughly entertaining and modern Bond tale.

[Fera Festiva]

The Neverending Story. [...] The sequel movies don't even attempt to follow the remainder of the book. They're just fanciful spinoffs.

Wordo McWord. The book is absolutely amazing; the movie, I felt, was OK on the surface but its underlying message, conclusion, etc were completely off. (Like the luck dragon coming into the real world at the end to chase off bullies? :headdesk: )

The Princess Diaries movie was awful too. I know the books are for teenage girls, but I've read a couple and quite enjoyed them - the heroine is quirky and interesting, the plots are fun, the other characters are believeable. The movie, which was made by Disney, was truly awful. It completely sanitised the plot, her character, and the circumstances she was in, making the whole thing much more mainstream and unthreatening. For example, in the book, the parents are divorced and she is happy about that. In the movie, they were totally in love and the dad died tragically. There are loads of other examples that bothered me too.

Generally what bothers me most with adaptations is when the plot is (roughly) kept but the spirit of the story is lost, which was the problem with both of those. I don't mind the odd change of plot/dialogue/order of events, or even a slightly different ending, as long as what made the book good in the first place is still there.

[Jpurple]

Johnny Mnemonic This is what happens when you take a decent (for William Gibson) short story and try to turn it into a full-length movie. Bad bad bad bad bad.

I have to also say as a fan of the book Watership down, I was not very fond of the movie.
Jurassic Park is the only movie I've seen where I preferred the movie to the book, and that's mostly because I'm not a big fan of Michael Crichton's writing style.

[Broomjockey]

Johnny Mnemonic This is what happens when you take a decent (for William Gibson) short story and try to turn it into a full-length movie. Bad bad bad bad bad.

Argh! I'd managed to block that out until now! (And I own the DVD, so that's quite the feat!) I'd gotten the movie before I read the story. It was an okay movie right up until I read the story, and now I can't stand to even touch the thing.

[draftermatt]

The Firm by John Grisham.

The ending was no where near of that in the book, too many things changed, and it was too short.

[CaroPhoenix]

Auntie Mame:
The book is by Patrick Denis. The movie is starring Rosalind Russell (one of my all-time favorite actresses) - the movie also leaves out the last 1/4 or so of the ending of the book, which IMHO is a good thing - too long and unneccessary. The movie adaptation came out in 1958. In the late 1960's, there was a Broadway adaptation of the movie starring Angela Lansbury. In the early 1970's (I think 1971/72), the musical was turned into a movie starring Lucille Ball as Mame & Bea Arthur as her best friend. (Saw the movie musical first, loved it, then saw the movie with R.R. and have now come to HATE the musical).

Here is a little interesting trivia for you:

There is a book called Almighty Me written by a Virginia author named Robert Bausch. The book is about a used car salesman named Chet who is down on his luck, can't sell his cars, his wife is thinking of leaving him, and he blames God for everything wrong in his life. Then God shows up. Tells him being God isn't an easy thing to do. Chet doesn't believe him. So God does the only thing he can think of: Goes on vacation and gives Chet his powers. Hilarity ensuees (like the scene where he causes a flood to keep his wife from leaving, etc.). Highly entertaining book. Disney (or one of its affiliates bought the rights to the book) and then let it sit. It got to the script stage, but then Bob heard nothing about it for years. Then Jim Carrey said he stumbled upon a script that no one was using, was a few years old, and he gets the movie "Bruce Almighty" out of it?

"Bruce Almighty" is an entertaining movie, to be sure. I love Jim Carrey. But I do have a sneaky suspicion that the old, abandoned script he found was the one based on Almighty Me.

[ReverendBSB]

The Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker.

They were pretty much just using the titles by that point, but they both bear no resemblance to the books. Unlike the later For Your Eyes Only, which wove the short stories from the book into a thoroughly entertaining and modern Bond tale.

Ian Fleming HATED his own book, The Spy Who Loved Me. Before he would allow it to be licensed for a movie, he demanded that the movie would be completely different from the book. So they get a pass there.

As for Moonraker, the filmmakers were trying to get some Star Wars money.

[Becks]

A co-worker of mine said that the book Forrest Gump was very different than the movie. He hates the movie but loved the book.

Didn't care for the movie, but hated the book MUCH more.

GREAT book to movie? The Notebook. I actually liked the ending of the movie much better...

I'm conflicted about Gone With the Wind. I love the book, love the movie, but the movie left out so many things!!!!!

[Severen13]

The 2004 remake of Salem's Lot aka How To Slaughter A Good Novel In One Easy Lesson.

*SPOILERS BELOW*

*Reducing Barlow to basically a cameo appearance. (yeah, yeah, the Barlow character in the 1979 version was completely different from the Barlow in the book, but at least he wasn't turned into a complete dork).

*Making Straker into a total doofus.

*Reducing Susan Norton to just another pretty face.

*Making Ben Mears a non-fiction writer who was once held prisoner by the Taliban. Huh?

*Making Matt Burke gay? WTF?? Alrighty then....just what does that add to the story? Absolutely Zero.

*Turning Father Callahan into a murderer.

*Changing Eva Miller's name, which comes about from one little paragraph in the book.

*Eva marrying Weasel. Aaarrgghhh!!!!

*Two words: Ruthie Crockett. In the book, she's a throwaway character who doesn't even have any dialogue. In this version, she gets an ungodly amount of screen time. Again, May I please ask what is happening here? ? While we're at it, why did Sandy McDougall, Dud Rogers, and Charlie Rhodes get so much friggin' screen time, too? Did the idiot who wrote the screenplay even read the novel?

*Utterly and completely screwing up the scenes when Mike Ryerson returns to Matt Burke's house and Mrs. Glick wakes up in the morgue.

*When did the Marsten House become visible from every single window in town?

*Vampire!Ralphie Glick asking permission to pull back the curtain. Do vampires need to ask permission for that?

*The ridiculously pretentious conversations about writing and art between Ben and Susan.

*Turning the female vampires into sex-kittens with violet eyeshadow and crimped hair.

*Both Ben and Floyd being arrested after the fight. Then vampire!Floyd squeezes into an air vent in a scene that winds up being unintentionally hilarious. In the book Floyd beats up Ben and puts him in the hospital.


I could go on and on, but you get the idea. I'll take the 1979, flaws and all, any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

[digilight]

All Stephen King items here.

The Shinning - Awsome Movie and Book

Running Man (penned as Richard Bachman, as a short story) - Good but completely different from the movie would say average.

Pet Cemetary - Good book, retarded as a movie

Honorable Mention: Dream Catcher - Good Book, Good Movie, Hard to compare the two. But this is a very hard one to bring to the screen as the book is written.

My dads pick for worst: Saharah by Clive Cussler, great book, but the movie left a lot to be desired. The choices for actors didnt live up to the images he created in the series.

[Emmeileia]

Good: Fern Gully. You lose a bit of detail in the movie, but the message is still the same. And who dosen't love Batty?

Bad: Troy. Based on the Illiad my fat behind. More like the Illiad on opposite day. Almost everyone who is supposed to survive dies, and almost everyone who is supposed to die survives. Paris and Helen run off together...when he is supposed to die and she is supposed to by hauled back home by her husband. ALL references to the gods taken out. Patrocles is now Achilles cousin and ONLY his cousin. And no Amazons, no Cassandra...


I have high hopes for Anne McCaffrey's Dragonflight movie.

[Tanasi]

Battlefield Earth is a great book, Battlefield Earth the movie was a black hole of suck.
Gods and Generals and Gettysburg are good adaptations.
Lonesome Dove is a pretty good movie and great book.

[Kara]

Oh so many film adaptations to hate, so little time.

I'll agree with the comments about Stephen King's work. They just love to trash his work. I'll give honorable mention to The Shining (the remake, not the Kubrik crapfest), The Stand (not as good as the book, but not ruined), The Green Mile (more sappy than the books, but still good), and It (again, the book was far better, but Tim Curry gave a legendary performance as Pennywise).

Salem's Lot: I was looking forward to the remake, hoping they'd get it right. When it was over, I wanted to cry.

The Tommyknockers: Not his best book, but they were afraid to end the movie on a downer. In the movie, Gard's sacrifice saved the town and undid the power the aliens had over its people. In the book, he killed Bobbi after she tried to tentacle-rape him, still blew himself up to destroy the ship, and the townspeople who survived were either slaughtered by the government or taken away to a secret lab to be studied and dissected.

The Langoliers: There are acres upon acres of actors in Hollywood, so who in the hell decided the Cousin Balky would be the best person to play Toomey?

I can't wait to see how badly Eli Roth mutilates Cell. And since From a Buick 8 is a Dark Tower-related story, you know they'll screw it up real bad (Hearts in Atlantis, anyone?). In the movie, the car is probably a gateway to Hell. Or some kind of alien planet. Or Canada.

Also, the comments about Jurassic Park are valid. I saw the movie before I read the book, then was furious after reading it by how much they cheated me out of. But if Spielberg might have cast a casual glance at the first novel, he didn't even read Lost World. As fun as it is throwing a T-Rex in downtown San Francisco and all, the book kicked its ass.

Also, Timeline: WTF??

If they ever make a movie of Next (and no, the Nicolas Cage movie that was out a few months ago was in no way related to Crichton's novel), I'm going to run and hide until it goes away. There is all kinds of potential for disaster there.

One film I actually liked better than the book was Red Dragon. I really don't care for the writing style of Thomas Harris, he tends to make my eyes bleed with some, uh, unique writing habits. The one bad thing about the film was that they mentioned Will's ability to learn to put himself in the killer's shoes, but they barely scratched the surface. In the book, we see him thinking and feeling just like Dorlahyde in a few places (and we get the full history of Dorlahyde to see what made him the psycho he is).

Interesting fact: There was a movie made back in the 1986 called "Manhunter" which is the adaptation of Red Dragon. This was a good 5 years before Silence of the Lambs. It's worth watching, I actually like the Hannibal Lecter in that movie better than Anthony Hopkins.

[Fera Festiva]

Ah, how could I forget Howl? Dah!

I'm with you, mae - the movie is good (in particular the animation - Miyazaki is a genius) but the book is fantastic.

[Ryu]

thank you tanasi!
i loved the book but the movie... oh man... what happened!?!?

[CSR Kim]

If they ever make a movie of Next (and no, the Nicolas Cage movie that was out a few months ago was in no way related to Crichton's novel), I'm going to run and hide until it goes away. There is all kinds of potential for disaster there.

Oddly enough, Next (the Nicolas Cage movie) is "based" on a short story by Philip K. Dick, called The Golden Man. When I read the synopsis of the movie, I had to go :confused: There isn't enough of a similarity between the two to make me even want to say the movie is based on the short story.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Golden_Man
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Next_%28film%29

[CSR Kim]

I just thought of another one. New Rose Hotel, originally a short story by William Gibson. The movie has Christopher Walken and Willem Dafoe in it (that should mean automatic awesome, right?). Unfortunately, not only is it a terrible adaptation, but it's a terrible movie as well. We turned it off about halfway through, because it was utterly confusing and hard to follow, and I had read the story it is based on.

[myswtghst]

It (again, the book was far better, but Tim Curry gave a legendary performance as Pennywise).

It's awesome to me, mostly for camp-factor, and Tim Curry, obviously. I adore the book, but I totally enjoy the "movie" and always watch it when I catch it on tv.

The Langoliers: There are acres upon acres of actors in Hollywood, so who in the hell decided the Cousin Balky would be the best person to play Toomey?

We used to rent this just to be amazed at how idiotic and overlong it was when I was younger. For a short story, they managed to make a really long movie. And Balky? Seriously, WTF?

[Pagan]

The Spy Who Loved Me and Moonraker.

They were pretty much just using the titles by that point, but they both bear no resemblance to the books. Unlike the later For Your Eyes Only, which wove the short stories from the book into a thoroughly entertaining and modern Bond tale.

You beat me to it!

Auntie Mame:
The book is by Patrick Denis. The movie is starring Rosalind Russell (one of my all-time favorite actresses) - the movie also leaves out the last 1/4 or so of the ending of the book, which IMHO is a good thing - too long and unneccessary.

I love that movie! I've tried watching the musical and just can't do it.

Dune. In all of its forms.

The book is great. The first movie, with Sting. Was one ill always enjoy.
The Scifi Mini-series made me want to slit my wrists to make it end. All 6 hours of it.
The second mini-series, Children of Dune, was based on Dune Messiah And Children of Dune combined. (probly 40-60) And i couldnt watch it all the way. Yes i did watch it. but i couldnt get into it.

Finally, someone else that couldn't stand the Sci-Fi Channel version. Mainly, I preferred the theatrical releases sand worms! :lol: The planetary descriptions matched much better, too. (Have you read Hunters of Dune yet?) I was because of this movie, though, that I learned to never sit next to my father if he's read the book the movie is based on. All you will hear all the way through is, "tsk-sigh"!

I'm sure some people are going to disagree, but the "Da Vinci Code" was actually pretty good. Naturally, some artistic license had to be taken. I can't wait for "Angels & Demons"!

One that really got me was "Clear and Present Danger". Now, I love Harrison Ford and will watch anything he's in....BUT....if you've read the books that Jack Ryan is in, Alec Baldwin does look like him. Plus, the members of the Royal Family that Jack saves in the book are Diana and Charles, not just some random royals!

I'm really hoping that there are never movie versions of Diana Gabaldon's books. One, there's just too much to cram into 2-3 hours and I can't think of anybody that would suffice for Jamie, Clair, Brianna, Roger, and Lord John.

[Bella_Vixen]

I'm really hoping that there are never movie versions of Diana Gabaldon's books. One, there's just too much to cram into 2-3 hours and I can't think of anybody that would suffice for Jamie, Clair, Brianna, Roger, and Lord John.

I whole heartedly agree.

[TruthHurts]

I just remembered another one The First Wives Club by Olivia Goldsmith. The book was great, the movie cut out so much of the "darker" plot points in order to make it into a lightweight comedy. Ick

[Binky]

Queen of the damned! The books where awesome! the movie was SHITE! it wasn't even close to the books. Yes books! they combined Queen of the damned with The vampire lestat were mooshed into one movie

Movie took the basic story line of queen of the damned, and changed pretty much everything. Lestat has BLOND hair, and is not a tool. The vampires don't HISS and snarl at each other like cats. Lestat was not made by Marius, he was mad by Magnus who was a random Vampire that died as soon as he made Lestat. Lestat didn't steal the violin from some random girl he killed, he got it off Niki his lover who killed himself. Marius had long blond hair and didn't paint modernistic paintings, Jessie didn't become Lestats lover, lestat had nothing to do with her really. HE didn't change her into a Vampire, it was her ancestor Maharete that did it. It was Maharetts TWIN SISTER that killed Akasha not all the vampires...ahh I could go on forever.

Basically I think that was the worst transition from book to movie I have ever seen and Eragon comes a VERY close second..but I won't go into the specifics there.

[Greenday]

Some that were OK...Where the Red Fern Grows

I thought the book was great. Movie was laughable

Let's see good ones would be Fight Club, and Silence of the Lambs

Bad: Starship Troopers

Both first two movies were AMAZING. As for Starship Troopers, I liked the 1st one. I hear a lot of people who read it first didn't like the movie. But if you haven't seen Starship Troopers 2...DON'T! Such a terrible movie.

[Kara]

But if you haven't seen Starship Troopers 2...DON'T! Such a terrible movie.

It gets worse (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0844760/).

[Becks]

I'm really hoping that there are never movie versions of Diana Gabaldon's books. One, there's just too much to cram into 2-3 hours and I can't think of anybody that would suffice for Jamie, Clair, Brianna, Roger, and Lord John.

I agree, along with Bella.

IF ever such a horrible thing happened, I'd boycott them.

[auntiem]

*snip*
Interesting fact: There was a movie made back in the 1986 called "Manhunter" which is the adaptation of Red Dragon. This was a good 5 years before Silence of the Lambs. It's worth watching, I actually like the Hannibal Lecter in that movie better than Anthony Hopkins.

I was going to bring this one up, but you beat me to it. Everything about this movie is better IMO. I vaguely remember that it was made after someone saw the director's student film using the same script, but right now I can't remember who the director is.

Lathe of Heaven - the PBS (or was it BBC?) version was great! The tv mini series they did a few years ago sucked - miscast and they changed the ending.

As for Jurassic Park - we played it for 8 weeks at my theatre - I loathe that movie!
It was pure freakin' torture. I lost the last shred of respect I ever had for Spielburg as a director - I've never seen so many continuity mistakes in a single film before. If I ever see him in person I am going to bitch slap him so hard his glasses will be found in the next county. Then I'm going to demand he pay for my hypnotherapy to finally erase the memory of the movie from my mind.

That said - I think Remains of the Day was actually better than the book.

[Rapscallion]

Then I'm going to demand he pay for my hypnotherapy to finally erase the memory of the movie from my mind.


Um, doesn't that mean that you'll forget how bad it was and then watch it again?

Bad plan.

Rapscallion

[cinema guy]

Um, doesn't that mean that you'll forget how bad it was and then watch it again?



Sounds like this: http://www.galactanet.com/comic/596.htm

[Greenday]

It gets worse (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0844760/).

At least they are bringing the original characters back.

[myswtghst]

Queen of the damned! The books where awesome! the movie was SHITE!

While the movie was a TERRIBLE adaptation of the book(s), I have to admit, I find Stuart Townsend quite yummy as Lestat, and I LOVE the soundtrack/score--a BeeGee and the lead singer from KORN? Who knew that could work? ;)

[Dragonlover]

The first three HP films were good, but they started going downhill with Goblet of Fire.

I'm assuming we can include comic book movies in this as well? If so, my vote for worst goes to X Men 3. They somehow managed to take one of the greatest storylines from the Marvel Universe and turn it into an irredeemable pile of utter twaddle. They had the Phoenix, but somehow forgot to do a firebird. Also, the change from it being a seperate entity to 'Oh yeah, its just her normal powers' really sucked.

Dragonlover

[Fera Festiva]

The first three HP films were good, but they started going downhill with Goblet of Fire.

Funny - I thought more or less the opposite (first two godawful, after that, better). That's mainly because of the direction though - Chris Columbus is a pretty awful director IMO, whilst Alfonso Cuaron is a genius, and the next two followed in a similar vein (not as good as him though). Agree to disagree, I guess? :)

If we're talking about comic books, though - V for Vendetta, anyone? For me, that's another one that left behind a lot of what originally made it good. Oh, and I can't believe I didn't mention this one before - Tank Girl! Almost unrecognisable.

[Dragonlover]

I'm thinking in terms of sticking to the plot of the books, as opposed to just going 'oh yeah we'll have that bit, that bit and that bit'. Goblet of Fire was the worst for that.

Dragonlover

[Fera Festiva]

Oh, yeah, I agree with you there. I just saw Phoenix with my brother - he has never read them, and he was pretty confused as to what was happening.

Still - the later books are so long, they were always going to have to cut out some of the plot. After the first two I tried to kind of give up thinking the movies would ever match my view of the books, and instead I've just focused on enjoying the explosions, Alan Rickman being sarcastic, the set design and all that stuff. :)

[Cia]

I love Rita Mae Brown's 'Mrs. Murphy Mystery' series but the made-for-TV movie sucked. The Virginia accents were close I guess. But casting Ricky Lake as the lead...what in the hell were they thinking? Ricky Lake doesn't look anything like how Mary 'Harry' Harristeen is described. And they changed some of the characters around for some unknown reason. What a way to ruin a perfectly good book.

[CaroPhoenix]

How about all those Dannielle Steele novels that became made-for-TV movies?

The one that I truely hated was the very last book turned into a made-for-TV movie: Rememberance. That was the ONLY novel I liked by her. She helped to write the script and even then, it was entired mucked up! :confused:

[Becks]

I love Rita Mae Brown's 'Mrs. Murphy Mystery' series but the made-for-TV movie sucked.

Wow. I didn't even know about that.


Another vote from me--Anything based on the "Little House" books.

[AFpheonix]

At least they are bringing the original characters back.

Well, it's not like Casper Van Dien is doing anything else....

[Aldous]

Fahrenheit 451. They got rid of Clarrisse's part, Faber's part, and the dogs. They killed the whole story since Clarrisse and Faber are the most important side characters. And the Robotic Lovecraftian Dogs were the whole friggin' police force at the end. They ruined, in my opinion, Bradbury's only kick ass book.