
In adapting a book for the big screen, adjustments are obviously necessary and often understandable — except when they're quite frustrating. Earlier this year the news came out that the My Sister's Keeper filmmakers were changing the end of the story for the film version, causing a bit of apprehension for fans of the Jodi Picoult novel. In my opinion, the change made sense for the film, but I also understand the loyalty people feel toward the source material.
Today there's more casting news for the film adaptation of Elizabeth Gilbert's Eat Pray Love (Billy Crudup will play Gilbert's husband) and the description of this character doesn't quite mesh with my memory of the book. Here's more:
Crudup will play Steven, who is married to Gilbert ([Julia] Roberts). His hopes to have children are dashed when her quest to get pregnant leaves her feeling she is not living the life she wants. She embarks on a journey of self-discovery around the world.
Granted, it's been a while since I read Eat Pray Love, but that's not how I remember her husband. I'd wondered if they'd include much of Gilbert's husband at all in the film, and I certainly didn't think he'd be painted as such a heartbroken victim. From reading the book, I didn't get the sense that he was much of a victim at all and it seems more than a little unfair to say that Gilbert "dashed his hopes" by wanting to do something for herself. Perhaps it's just an issue of wording within the news article, but it annoys me nonetheless.
Are there changes in film adaptations that have irritated you?

















Inspirations
Cosmence
Autograph
"I am Legend" by Richard Matheson. The movie was absolutely nothing like the book, and the book was so much scarier and intellegent, the will smith version was laughable and incorrect to the source material. What makes me angrier is now the cover of Mathesons book, is the Movie poster.....!!!
Every Single Disney Movie has changed the book that its based on, to be more kid friendly I understand but it still bugs me.
The Other Boleyn Girl. Grrrr they messed that movie up so badly, I wish they has stuck with the book version. Henry never ever raped Anne in the book, ever. I dont understand why that was put in there.
1Every Harry Potter movie. I realize the books are too long to throw it all in there but they have been taking liberties in the last two.
"I Am Legend" -- I love this short story but no one has ever had the cojones to use the real ending.
2I was *just* going to say the same thing about the Other Boleyn Girl. I hated that movie so much, and the gratuitous rape scene is one of the biggest reasons.
3My Sister's Keeper I think pissed me off the most. Trying to fit too much content into such a short period of time. Getting a lawyer so quick bothered me, right down to the ending -- which absolutely made it look ridiculous. The twist was such a great part of the book...and it really made you think, as well. "I Am Legend" was also very disappointing.
4Ditto to the every single harry potter movie comment! They couldn't have messed them up any more!
5Thankfully the Twilight books are much, much better on film though.
As for "Eat, Pray, Love," it certainly sounded like he was on the losing end of that divorce. The description sounds about right to me, though I didn't think they'd make him much of a character either.
6The other boleyn girl, circle of friends and Marley and Me. There were only a few changes in Marley but i read it and then immediately watched the movie and it bugged me.
7I am apprehensive of seeing The Time Travellers Wife. The trailors for the movie make the movie seem sappy and an epic love story. The book was a love story but it was by no means sappy. I guess I'll have to wait to see the entire movie.
8While they have taken liberties with Harry Potter, I dont mind it at all. I just hope they stick to the last book pretty closely as in the people who die should die, no happy endings.
9I agree with the Harry Potter movies. One of my favorite books of the series was The Half Blood Prince and...the movie was...not that great.
10I agree with CG about the Harry Potter movies. The one I was most disappointed with was THe Order of the Phoenix. I actually thought they did a great job with Half Blood Prince. I also agree with CG that they definitely need to follow the final book as strictly as possible.
I don't even want to see My Sisters Keeper even though I loved the book. Mainly because I can't stand Cameron Diaz, but also since hearing that they changed the ending.
11My. Sister's. Keeper. It's such a shame they ruined the fantastic casting of Cameron and Abigail by inane plot changes and a ruined ending.
12The golden compass by philip pullman. the movie was not right at all!!!
13Although I love the Harry Potter movies, I think they could've been better. I understand why they have to cut out the day-to-day stuff from the book (like Herbology class, for example), but it annoys me that they completely shorten or remove the pivotal moments from the books (like the Department of Mysteries scene at the end of Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix). I think the Lord of the Rings movies are good examples of how to properly adapt a book. They stayed true to the novels, but they cut out the unnecessary and boring parts of the book and added great elements (like the larger presence of Arwen and her love story with Aragorn).
I was also very disappointed with the adaptation of The Other Boleyn Girl. The book was so good, but the movie was terrible & completely different from the novel.
14I cant believe they're going to make eat pray love a movie. yuck
15I still can't get over 'The Cider House Rules' film adaptation. The book was AMAZING and then I watched the film and was downright pissed!
16I really NEED to learn my lesson cause I always give the film a chance, but end up getting my feelings hurt. Books are just too incredible to translate into film.
I am so worried about Time Traveler's Wife ( I love the actors they chose though)
But the previews make it look like a sappy chick flick and the book is so much deeper than that.
Harry Potter Movies- I dont think Order of Phx & Azakban adaptions were that bad, the books are long so I can understand why some plot points were cut out. But the others...
I think pretty much any movie I have seen based on a book, I prefer the book. Except Christine by Stephen King, creepy move and better than book I think.
17Pretty much any book made into a movie never is as good as the book, and I end up disappointed.
18I've never read the Other Boleyn Girl book, but I'm surprised to hear the rape scene wasn't in there! It ruined the movie for me and really upset me. I think the ratings should warn about scenes like that.
It hasn't come out yet, but I'm not looking forward to the movie version of Fantastic Mr. Fox. I just saw the trailer and it looks pretty dramatically different from the story I loved so much as a kid.
19I loved, loved the book The Other Boleyn Girl. I refuse to see the movie because I've heard they messed with the original story so badly. No thanks!
20I hate hate HATED the Prisoner of Azkaban. If you did not read that book, the movie makes ZERO sense. They never even tell you that James Potter turned into a stag. That was my favorite HP book. I was devastated.
Memoirs of a Geisha was also a TERRIBLE movie, and I loved the book.
21UGH, I was SO ANGRY that they added that random stupid scene into the HP6 movie - the one where the Weasley's house got set on fire. WTF?
22when i was like 12 Ella Enchanted was my FAVORITE book I LOVED it and then they made it into a movie and i was really excited. and then the movie was COMPLETELY different than the book like there were no similarities besides her name was Ella. I was really upset.
23I don't think I've ever watched a film adaptation that stayed true to the book. You can't really expect it to, but I still get disappointed every time. I agree with all the Harry Potter comments - the movies are not really true to the books, but if they were, the movies would be hours long. Right now, I am not impressed with all the changes to the Twilight movies!
24I'm glad someone said Memoirs of a Geisha - I love that book but the movie was a huge let down.
25And of course...the HP movies. Enough has been said about that though!
Also I hated the Power of One movie...
In fact, I'm pretty much always disappointed with how books made in to movies turn out!
Most films are not as good as the book, I've stopped expecting them to be. I still love it when they make a film of a book, I just try to lower my expectations. I think it also helps to not watch the film directly after reading the book.
26Sarana, I completely agree. I think a lot of people have high expectations for film adaptations when they really just need to separate the two. The films are the films and the books are the books. the books will always be better. like with harry potter, if i want all the details i'll read the books again... if i want the story in a nutshell i'll watch the movies.
27My husband and I both felt like they completely massacred the film translation of Angels & Demons. There were so many changes!
I also don't understand why the Bridget Jones movies are nothing like the books that they're supposedly based on. They're hilarious books that are completely rewritten for the movies.
I'm debating about re-reading Time Traveler's Wife before the movie comes out. I loved the book but I don't want to be let down by the changes that are inevitably in the movie.
28I echo everyone on the Time Travelers Wife... the book was amazing, there is no way the movie can be as good.
I also thought About a Boy was a bad adaptation, I love the movie for itself but it doesn't connect the way the book does so I have to seperate them. Maybe thats what Ill do with the Time Travelers Wife.
29I actually thought Fried Green Tomatoes was a wonderful book to movie adaptation. They left out some of my favorite parts, but the movie was still great.
30agreed with #22;;
31how in the world are they going to fix that in the 7th movie?
gah, there should be a law banning the making of movies based off of books.
I agree that most of the adaptations of Harry Potter are done well and in keeping with the books, they have undoubtedly removed big chunks but chunks that were not pivitol to the story, however Half Blood Prince I was fuming about!! All that time and waiting and the film did not live up to my expectations nor did it give justice to the story with it being the pivitol book that moves it to its conclusion. Harry was supposed to be hidden under a cloak and petrified!!, Dumbledore's funeral was removed and it is crucial to the story, a statement was put out in haste explaining the need to lift the depression at the end but this is not a hollywood story, the fact is they spent too long on gooey love scenes and not enough on the fundementals, this I believe was a big mistake because dumbledores tomb is talked about a lot in deathly hallows because of the elder wand and voldemort. I could go on and on but I wont..It gets me more angry!!..lol
32I fact, I could make a huge list of what I percieve to be important scenes, that hold clues and information that they have removed from the film!! I agree with 22 and 31 that the scene does not exist in any shape or form in the book and they could have spent the time on more appropriate scenes. That was done for sheer effect and not for the good of the story. Lestrange came nowhere near the burrow! Grrrr..
33Gone with the Wind. There's entire characters missing from that movie. Granted, it's still one of my favorite movies, but it can't even compare to the book.
34THE HORSE WHISPERER.
35Totally different ending. It undermined the essence of the character Mr. Redford portrayed.
The worst adaptation ever has to go to Clan of the Cave Bear, IMHO. I was also very disappointed with Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason. I think the character got stripped down for cheap laughs. Oh well. I probably won't see My Sister's Keeper, and I have a hard time wrapping my head around Eat Pray Love as a movie. Best of luck on that!
36i agree with Angels and Demons. The last half of the movie was nothing like the book.
37"Running With Scissors" the movie was the worst i have ever seen... ever, and it actually ruined the book for me, I doubt i'd be able to read it again.
38Every time you bring up a question like this it gives me a chance to rant about A Walk to Remember, but seriously the only thing they kept the same in that movie was the names of the characters.
39-the book is set in the 50s, the movie is set in the present
-Landon isn't supposed to be such a malcontent, he's supposed to be an average kid
-The book never says if or when Jamie dies. Though it is heavily foreshadowed, it's left up to the reader to decide.
GRRR!!
definitely angles and demons! they completely eliminated several characters from the book, and kept alive characters who were supposed to die. plus they completely glazed over the whole science-religion debate that was constantly addressed in the book which is what i found so interesting about it in the first place! i understand they wanted to make a movie that people who didn't read the book could actually follow, but they didn't need to "dumb it down" so severely.
40I agree with what a lot of others have said. Movies are typically not as enjoyable and thorough as books.
However, like Mich, I enjoyed Fried Green Tomatoes. I also enjoyed The Great Gatsby. The films didn't compare to the books, but they were good.
I keep hearing rumblings of an Atlas Shrugged movie. I just have to say, there is no way they could ever make a movie that incorporates all of the important aspects and details of that book. But, if one were ever made, I would probably feel compelled to see it, then I would be mad at myself because there's no way it could stack up!
41The Harry Potter movies always annoy me, especially the Half Blood Prince. They cut out so much important stuff, and added random scenes, I was really disappointed.
42The Lord of the Rings movies cut out some things, but all in all I thought the adaption was successful. I realize they couldn't put everything in, and I think they put in as much as they could; I love the movies as much as the books.
lilk, I know what you mean and I'd probably do the same thing (go see it and be pissed afterward). It's a 1,000 page book, how can that possibly become a screenplay?
We just need some original ideas out there. Why must we convert every book into film. It's not necessary. Come up with your own plots!
43Thank Your For Smoking by Christopher Buckley -- I read this book when it first came out and it's a very good satire, but the character of Nick in the book is a basically good guy who is very conflicted about his work. This wasn't what he wanted to do but after an BIG BIG GOOF-UP in his early career, he pretty much couldn't work in journalism any more. I hated how in the movie they made his character sleazy. In the book, he doesn't "relish" his job and feels a great deal of guilt over it. The only way he justifies it to himself is that he's doing it "to pay the mortgage".
44"Gone with the Wind. There's entire characters missing from that movie. Granted, it's still one of my favorite movies, but it can't even compare to the book."
I was going to say pretty much the same exact thing. I love both. The book is one of my favorites, and the movie is one of my favorites. However, the movie just isn't the same.
45Post New Comment
Please share your opinion with our community, but make sure it is on topic and follows our Community Rules. We moderate comments and prohibit personal attacks, threats, spam, lewd images, or the promotion of your personal website.