- May 5, 2009
I try to do that too, and I have no objections to them leaving out certain bits or summing things up, to make the movie flow better and to actually fit it all into a film (eg Lord of the Rings, they left a lot of stuff out, but I think they had to, and they didn't mess about too much with what was left). What I hate most of all is stupid changes like a character in the book having black hair, and being played by Nicole Kidman in the film. It shouldn't really matter, I know, but it just makes me think the director or casting person hasn't even bothered to read the book! Silly things like that, that they had no reason to change, but just felt like it. Maybe that's just me though, I get very clear pictures of characters in my head.I try to enjoy a movie based on a movie's merits, not that it was based off a book, some of them as said above left such a foul taste in my mouth on abusing a good name like that....
And for example in the fourth Harry Potter film (which by the way are some of the most awful book-to-film adapatations I've ever seen) they give away right at the very start who the secret bad guy is all along. You're not MEANT to know that until the very end. That's the whole point of building suspense till the end. It'd be like somebody coming up to Poirot with a lead pipe covered in blood and the corpse's head down his shirt. And my little sister thinks she knows all about Harry Potter cause she's seen the films, and she can't even be arsed to read the books when I point out how ignorant she actually is. She tries to correct me when I'm talking about it!
This is a pet peeve of mine, and one of the main things I rant about, so I do apologise for somewhat rambling, angry spinster-with-too-many-cats type posts!