Go Back   Horror.com Forums - Talk about horror. > Horror Movie Discussion > Latest Horror Movies
Register FAQ Community Calendar

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #21  
Old 01-27-2006, 09:51 AM
urgeok's Avatar
urgeok urgeok is offline
Banned

 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 19,465
Quote:
Originally posted by hello,danny
I think faithfulness is a good quality to have--but not when making a film based on literature or other art. I mean, what's the point? Being "faithful" doesn't mean something is good (in my opinion), and it doesn't mean it deserves more praise.
being faithful has merits ...
as everyone knows - the source material is almost always more detailed, full, and generally better than the subsequent film ..
not always - but usually.

when a very popular and loved novel is adapted the loudest cry you hear from fans is how much it deviated from the origional.
changes are usually a result of time, budget, or understanding of the source.

That being said i have no problem with a competant filmmaker putting his own spin on things (a la Kubrick's Shining)

i'm happy to see a big screen budget with great actors compared to a bunch of TV stars struggling along with tha material and significantly smaller budget.

here's a formula: ...
lower budget = lower pay
lower pay = lesser talent (all aspects of a production)
lesser talent = a less than stellar output.

again - there are always lucky exceptions ... but they are few and far between.


as far as the 'its better to see a nice guy go bad instead of an already typcast whacko like Jack' : well, the character in the book wasn't a stable guy himself... he wasn't such a nice guy.
he was nuts from the beginning.

this story is similar to Session 9 in that respect.

a malevolent force inhabiting a building taking advantage of someone in the brink of self estruction .. a fragile personality.

or ... is it just madness ?
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-27-2006, 10:23 AM
AUSTIN316426808's Avatar
AUSTIN316426808 AUSTIN316426808 is offline
The Dork Knight

 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 14,618
I couldn't care less about movies sticking to their book counter parts.


If someone comes along and remakes Silence of the Lambs and it turns out ok and sticks closer to the book, that doesn't make it a better film nor would it become my favorite version strictly based on that irrelevance.
__________________
Whatever The Fuck Ever
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-27-2006, 11:27 AM
urgeok's Avatar
urgeok urgeok is offline
Banned

 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 19,465
you might not .. but a million people would ..

i dont care if it's done properly .. i.e. its just a good movie no matter what ...

but if it doesnt bother to try - or changes things so much that it doesnt resemble the book at all .. or messes with key points that made it a good story to begin with ... then just call it something else ...
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 01-27-2006, 11:29 AM
The STE's Avatar
The STE The STE is offline
The Emperor of America
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Dr. Zaius
Posts: 7,670
Send a message via AIM to The STE
a book is a book, a movie's a movie. Two totally different mediums.
__________________

===

WATCH MY MOVIES(UPDATED: 5/7/08, "No Exit")
RING OF HONOR: BEST WRESTLING IN THE WORLD


TOO GOOD FOR THE HDC BATTLE ROYALE
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-27-2006, 11:34 AM
urgeok's Avatar
urgeok urgeok is offline
Banned

 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 19,465
a book is a book, then it's adapted to a screenplay from which a movie is shot.

they are both telling stories .. one is a visual representation of the other.

one inspired the other.

there is a direct connection - different mediums or not.



actually this is no different than the arguement of remaking movies ... how close they kept to the origional - or not ..

Last edited by urgeok; 01-27-2006 at 11:39 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-27-2006, 11:43 AM
The STE's Avatar
The STE The STE is offline
The Emperor of America
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Dr. Zaius
Posts: 7,670
Send a message via AIM to The STE
no, it's almost impossible for a book and a movie to tell the EXACT same story.
__________________

===

WATCH MY MOVIES(UPDATED: 5/7/08, "No Exit")
RING OF HONOR: BEST WRESTLING IN THE WORLD


TOO GOOD FOR THE HDC BATTLE ROYALE
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-27-2006, 11:57 AM
AUSTIN316426808's Avatar
AUSTIN316426808 AUSTIN316426808 is offline
The Dork Knight

 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 14,618
Quote:
Originally posted by urgeok
a book is a book, then it's adapted to a screenplay from which a movie is shot.

they are both telling stories .. one is a visual representation of the other.

one inspired the other.

there is a direct connection - different mediums or not.

True, there is a connection but after they take the story there's no obligation to stick directly to the book, only to make a great film.

Kubrick did what he wanted to do and came up with one of the best horror films ever made. Mick Garris did what Stephen King wanted to do(stay close to the book)and came up with a just ok film.

A director has to do his own thing with a story.
__________________
Whatever The Fuck Ever
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-27-2006, 12:08 PM
urgeok's Avatar
urgeok urgeok is offline
Banned

 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 19,465
no one said anything about being 'exact'

just being faithful to the subject material or not.
(i.e. removing key characters - or radically changing them)

that is what upsets people who know the books ..

look at the uproar over the Harry Potter books.
people know them so well that they go to the theatre and expect to see the book come to life...


i havent seen any changes to those books that bothered me (like it does the rabid fankids) but i also understand why certain things were done.

i'm not arguing that they should or shouldnt do these things .. its up to the filmaker (for the most part)

i'm just saying that often the success of a movie can depend on how faithful it is to the source - especially if it is a very popular story.


for a really good example of this - wait until the davinci coce comes out ..
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-27-2006, 12:30 PM
AUSTIN316426808's Avatar
AUSTIN316426808 AUSTIN316426808 is offline
The Dork Knight

 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 14,618
I just think it's a little fanatical to dislike a film or prefer a lesser film just because of it's level of faithfulness to the book.
__________________
Whatever The Fuck Ever
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-27-2006, 12:31 PM
The STE's Avatar
The STE The STE is offline
The Emperor of America
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Dr. Zaius
Posts: 7,670
Send a message via AIM to The STE
Quote:
Originally posted by urgeok
no one said anything about being 'exact'

just being faithful to the subject material or not.
(i.e. removing key characters - or radically changing them)

that is what upsets people who know the books ..

look at the uproar over the Harry Potter books.
people know them so well that they go to the theatre and expect to see the book come to life...


i havent seen any changes to those books that bothered me (like it does the rabid fankids) but i also understand why certain things were done.

i'm not arguing that they should or shouldnt do these things .. its up to the filmaker (for the most part)

i'm just saying that often the success of a movie can depend on how faithful it is to the source - especially if it is a very popular story.


for a really good example of this - wait until the davinci coce comes out ..
oh don't even mention the fucking Harry Potter fans, those people are nuts. They're like glorified Trekkies
__________________

===

WATCH MY MOVIES(UPDATED: 5/7/08, "No Exit")
RING OF HONOR: BEST WRESTLING IN THE WORLD


TOO GOOD FOR THE HDC BATTLE ROYALE
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:57 PM.