News:

Welcome to week4paug.net 2.1 - same as it ever was! Most features have been restored, but please keep us posted on ANY issues you may be having HERE:  https://week4paug.net/index.php/topic,23937

Main Menu

"Choke" In Theaters 09-26-2008

Started by G. Augusto, August 29, 2008, 04:25:34 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

cactusfan

Quote from: rowjimmy on October 01, 2008, 01:49:13 PM
The adaptation of Fight Club was a work of genius.

hm.


seems to me the only books that work as movies are where people completely re-think the book in cimematic terms, and this rarely happens. anytime i hear that a filmmaker was 'loyal to the book,' i know it's gonna suck. books and movies are VERY different.

so for example, the Shining is awesome as a book, and it's also awesome as a movie, despite being entirely different.

and though i wouldn't necessarily say Apocalypse is better than Heart of Darkness, it's another great adaptation in that it uses the book as springboard for something different.

One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest is great in both versions.

Naked Lunch is certainly a trip in book and movie form, and wildly divergent.

antelope19

#16
I would say that Peter Jackson did the LOTR trilogy justice.  The movies weren't as good as the books, but honestly, how could they have been?  I think Jackson made every effort to be as accurate as possible short of entering Middle Earth himself.  And I think he even tried to do that. 
Quote
Good judgment comes from experience, and a lotta that comes from bad judgment

Hicks

Quote from: antelope19 on October 01, 2008, 04:02:39 PM
I would say that Peter Jackson did the LOTR trilogy justice.  The movies weren't as good as the books, but honestly, how could they have been?  I think Jackson made every effort to be as accurate as possible short of entering Middle Earth himself.  And I think he even tried to do that. 

werd, I couldn't imagine them being any better. 

I've never actually read Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? but Blade Runner is an all time favorite so I assume it's got to be at least as good as the book and I am definitely a Philip K. Dick fan as well.
Quote from: Trey Anastasio
But, I don't think our fans do happily lap it up, I think they go online and talk about how it was a bad show.

cactusfan

Quote from: Hicks on October 01, 2008, 05:03:07 PM
Quote from: antelope19 on October 01, 2008, 04:02:39 PM
I would say that Peter Jackson did the LOTR trilogy justice.  The movies weren't as good as the books, but honestly, how could they have been?  I think Jackson made every effort to be as accurate as possible short of entering Middle Earth himself.  And I think he even tried to do that. 

werd, I couldn't imagine them being any better. 

I've never actually read Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? but Blade Runner is an all time favorite so I assume it's got to be at least as good as the book and I am definitely a Philip K. Dick fan as well.


the book is really good... and very different. there's all kinds of other stuff going on in the book. the screenwriter was smart to narrow it way down and turn the movie into its own thing.


Mr Minor

Quote from: cactusfan on October 01, 2008, 07:44:12 PM
Quote from: Hicks on October 01, 2008, 05:03:07 PM
Quote from: antelope19 on October 01, 2008, 04:02:39 PM
I would say that Peter Jackson did the LOTR trilogy justice.  The movies weren't as good as the books, but honestly, how could they have been?  I think Jackson made every effort to be as accurate as possible short of entering Middle Earth himself.  And I think he even tried to do that. 

werd, I couldn't imagine them being any better. 

I've never actually read Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? but Blade Runner is an all time favorite so I assume it's got to be at least as good as the book and I am definitely a Philip K. Dick fan as well.


the book is really good... and very different. there's all kinds of other stuff going on in the book. the screenwriter was smart to narrow it way down and turn the movie into its own thing.



Jackson did a good job narrowing it down, but the end of the third book is such a better ending with Sauramon and the Shire and the fact that it isn't in there ruins it for me.  It brings everything back together and deals with all the issues of the shire, sauramon, and the way the hobbits deal with their changes.  Jackson had the ending going in the right direction, but fizzled. 
Still, I liked the movies and the special editions added a lot more stuff from the books.

Quote from: cactusfan on October 01, 2008, 03:56:27 PM
Quote from: rowjimmy on October 01, 2008, 01:49:13 PM
The adaptation of Fight Club was a work of genius.

hm.


seems to me the only books that work as movies are where people completely re-think the book in cimematic terms, and this rarely happens. anytime i hear that a filmmaker was 'loyal to the book,' i know it's gonna suck. books and movies are VERY different.

so for example, the Shining is awesome as a book, and it's also awesome as a movie, despite being entirely different.

and though i wouldn't necessarily say Apocalypse is better than Heart of Darkness, it's another great adaptation in that it uses the book as springboard for something different.

One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest is great in both versions.

Naked Lunch is certainly a trip in book and movie form, and wildly divergent.

Good point here.  Books that take the main idea but re-think it in cinematic terms really are good versions.  It's a tall order for a movie to be better than the book for me.