Reviews for Damn Hollywood! Good books, bad movies!

Reviews For: Damn Hollywood! Good books, bad movies! - Reviews: Page 1 of 2

GreenLantern500 2006-07-09 ch 1,	abuseSo true. I heard the reason "Jurassic Park" and "The Lost World" were so different was because the books were written at the same time as the movies. No excuse, though.
kt in the sky 2005-01-29 ch 1,	abusei agree with you all the way. also in the princess diaries her dad was like... ALIVE!? they KILLED him BASICALLY! and i'm so sick of Arwen... in the first book i swear she was in maybe one paragraph. maybe 2 sentances!! I reacommend that you read All American Girl, which is written by the same auothor of the princess diaries Meg Cabot, even if you aren't a merican. i think you mihgt like it and even if you don't theres always the fun in critisizing it!! adds this to favoriteslater! -kashe
Band Geek17 2005-01-21 ch 1,	abuseThis is too true! One example is Ella Enchanted. I loved the book, reading it over and over and over, millions of times...and what do they do? Turn it into just another good-guy-bad-guy romantic comedy. And it wouldn't even have been THAT bad...but THEN they had to go and add a stupid SONG and DANCE number at the end! They took away all of Ella's stubborn pride, and everything I loved about all the characters and plot. Reading the book, you wouldn't believe it's the same movie. Same for "Ring of Endless Light" if you've seen/read that one. Turning a deep, heartfelt, beautiful book into a cops-and-robbers teen-y bop action film. Disgraceful. ahem obviously, I agree.
chocoholic 2004-08-30 ch 1,	abuseI agree. I think I'm the only person in the whole wide world who liked the book Forrest Gump better than the film. The book was FUNNY, Goddamnit! Forrest in the book had an OPINION! But no, god forbid we should have any hollywood films with that amount of irony in. And they put a bloody soppy ending on it! It's wrong. It's so wrong. But sometimes I can see why they do it. Like I thought the lord of the rings films were too action-y and it should have been more of a fantasy. But if I'd made the films only I would have liked them. And if I want that I can just go and read the books. Good essay by the way. It's so wrong...
scapegrace 2004-08-30 ch 1,	abuseI agree wholeheartedly! I actually enjoyed the Princess Diaries 2 more than the first because I had no expectations that Meg Cabot's books would be accurately represented.
DarkSorceress 2004-08-29 ch 1,	abuseTrue that the books are being ruined...mind you, when the director makes the movie, he wants to make it interesting to everybody- including those who would never have read the book...and thus changes are made. The Arwen change was made because women do not have a big role in the original Lord of the Rings, so to keep up with the times, Jackson changed her. Anyways, very interesting essay! DarkSorceress
Svelte Devereaux 2004-08-29 ch 1,	abuseI agree wholeheartedly. Did you hear? They're totally botching up the movie for The Phantom Of The Opera? Even Lloyd Webber altered some parts for the musical! [I love the musical, though] Books are ruined because of movies that are unfaithful to the original. I take that out as an act of outright disrespect for the author in question. cough Potter cough Ella cough Troy cough Phantom cough cough cough*
Ella aint so Enchanted 2004-08-28 ch 1, anon.	abuseHE$RE HERE! HOLLYWOODS ROYALLY ** UP THESE BOOKS!!
Bickabee 2004-08-28 ch 1, anon.	abuseI think Hollywood does that to make the movies more appealing to the current generation of moronic braindead children. Like what they did to Ella Enchanted...dies Or maybe it's just Hollywood. Hollywood theory: "It HAS to have romance in it!"
Guin 2004-08-27 ch 1, anon.	abuseThey aren't always that bad, and sometimes sticking to the book can be a really bad thing. take the first two Harry Potter films, both (admit it) crap. Both saty failry both to the books, but are slow clunking and absolutly awful. not the fault of the books, just the film. Now, the third film is far far better, even though it doesn't stick as much to the book. It really dpends on how it's done. LOTR the film is fab, but even fabber if you look at it as just one glorious illustration for a fantastic book. Still, death to the terrible adaptations!
Tira 2004-08-27 ch 1, anon.	abusecough Ella Enchanted cough I completely agree.
TaraErin 2004-08-27 ch 1,	abusei think you make a good point, though it is important to remember that film and novel are two entirely different media, and not easily interchangable. Also, there are occasions where a movie adaptation is actually better than the book. For example, most people i talk to seem to agree that the movie 'fight club' was much more interesting and thought provocative than the book it was based on. Cheers.
Mbwun 2004-08-27 ch 1,	abuseTwo words: Starship Troopers. That said, even the best book adaptation would have to leave some of the book out--books are just too huge to fit into a two-hour movie, and the success of LOTR notwithstanding, people don't generally like four-hour epics. But I certainly agree that book adaptations ought to try to stay close to the books they adapt. ~He Who Walks On All Fours
Anne Chan 2004-08-26 ch 1, anon.	abuseI think the reason book-based films tend to be that way is because books aren't really formatted to be movies. There's too much going on, scenes aren't always picturesque, and sometimes characters aren't very appealing... to the directors, at least. But yeah, the movies still suck. And now, for some constructive criticism. I hope. ^_^ Your writing's interesting, I like the casual feel of it. Course, there are problem areas. You say "completely" a LOT. I'm sure you can think of other words to use... and also, since I'm on that subject, some phrasing could do with a little tweaking. "So not needed" could be turned into "unnecessary," you get the idea. Keep writing. =)
blackmamba 2004-08-26 ch 1,	abuseI'm pretty sure that some people wouldn't want to spend money on a movie if it were exactly like a book that they've read. Maybe some screenwriters think that they have to change the story so that it will be its own, original bit of film, because film and literature are arts in themselves, and really shouldn't be compared. Usually it doesn't turn out very well, like in the case of "The Princess Diaries". That was just a terrible movie, and a worse adaptation. And "Angela's Ashes" could never encapsulate the humour of the book, and the pride in his shame. But "Lord of the Rings" is already so complicated, I don't blame Peter Jackson for the Arwen thing. If another element of the book was brought to the screen, people new to the story would have been turned off. That being said, the best film scripts are indeed original ones. Quentin Tarantino, M. Night Shyamalan, and Sofia Coppolla are all brilliant storymakers and filmmakers. So you're point is well taken from this future film student!

Return to Top