Books into Movies

Remove all ads!

In most cases, whenever the movie starts, in the title says: 'based' or 'inspired' on x book".
If the movie LOTR should be filmed exactly as the book, it should last about 8 hours, and Liv Tyler wouldn't have had so much impact on the movie.

 

Dengo: I think you're way off the mark saying that in Tolkien's books good and evil aren't as clearly defined as in the movies - both have equally clear and basically unambiguous views on what good and evil are and who falls into each catagory.

I agree that they have totally different atmospheres - the books go for the complex multilayered world thing, which is their main strength. The movies use this to a much lesser extent, and focus mostly on things getting done.

The LotR movies are a good companion to the books. They are good in their own right.

 

Anyone think you could make a movie in the Forgotten Realms?

 

Definitely. I think eventually there will be one about Drizzt. It's got all the elements imo of a good movie and he's easily the most popular FR character; right up there or even moreso than Elminster. Especially with those reprints with the nifty covers of his novels, and comic versions of the Dark Elf trilogy. Add all that to the fame the R.A Salvatore himself is enjoying these days (guy wrote the SW: Ep II script, right?) and I'm practically waiting for a date.

 

What about books made into mini-series? Those usually work a bit better than movies. For example, I liked Dune and Children of Dune, they were a bit rushed though, even with a runtime of 4.5 hours each. Another good example would be The Count of Monte Cristo, a good adaptation of the book except for Gérard Depardieu in the role of Dantès. I have to also agree with the softness, that was critisized on IMDB.

[ December 29, 2006, 12:29: Message edited by: Erod ]

 

Gérard Depardieu is a fantastic actor, I cannot imagine him being a (or the) reason for a movie being crap.l

 

you got to be kidding, casino royal and moon raker sucks as books, Bond is generaly a complete morron in both books, and the story in the books are quite poorly written.

the rest I agree with, the books tends to be better then the films

they have, they sucked

 

Well, yes, he is a good actor. However, good actor or not, he just does not fit the role. Quite much the same reason why Sean Connery does not fit in the role of Gandalf. Granted, some might think of him as the perfect choice for it, but for me, it just does not work, at all.

 

Yeah, anyone remember the D&D movie "Dungeons and Dragons?" Top-grade Forgotten Realms material, right there...

By the way, I strongly advise all of you against seeing the movie Eragon. It doesn't matter whether you have or have not read the book, the movie is terrible no matter your interest or knowledge of the novels. There are few films that actually pull off the feat of making a book into a movie; To Kill A Mockingbird and Lord of the Rings come to mind. Eragon is not one of these movies.

 

Equester and BlckDeth@: We will ignore the two low budget D&D movies. I think there is a lot of potential in the Forgoten Realms.

Also worth considering are the "His Dark Materials" Series by Philip Pullman.

 

yeah, eragon sucked.

 

Just watched "A Scanner Darkly" which is based on a Philip K. Dick novel I read a few years ago. I thought they did a fine job of turning it into a movie.

 

"Fight Club" made for an excellent movie; although the book was fantastic as well. For those of you that have seen the movie, or even those that haven't, I highly recommend it.