I LOVE Alfonso Cuarón’s sci-fi action movie Children of Men. I’ve watched maybe six times and every time, the ending always almost brings me to tears. So when I learned it was adapted from P.D. James’ book of the same name, it was a no-brainer deciding what my next book would be.
After finishing the book, it wasn’t difficult to reach to the conclusion that I enjoyed the movie better.
While James’ book gives a more in-depth look at how human infertility and humanity’s slow death march towards extinction affects the sexual dynamic between men and women and almost demented ways humans try to cope with a world without children or a race of dead men walking, I feel the book dedicates WAY too much time describing the failing of human civilization and the Regrets and guilt of Theo Faron. It’s not even until after 2/3 through the book where it feels like the plot and story are properly paced and stuff of consequence actually begin to happen.
The film’s adaptation by, comparison, feels consistent in its pacing and the world building and woe-is-mes of Theo feel more compact a take up less of the audience’s time.
What books do you feel were worse than its film adaptation and why?
I agree with Jurassic Park, but some of Crichton’s other novels have terrible movie adaptations.
I love Congo the book, the movie is trash.
I love Sphere, and again, trash movie.
Timeline is considered one of his best (I enjoy it, but not one of my favs), and the movie is pretty shit.
Rising Sun is an odd case, as I don’t really like either the book or the movie, but for fans of the book, they usually prefer it, and the movie didn’t get good reviews when it came out.
The Great Train Robbery and The Andromeda Strain are classics, but I’ve never seen the adaptations of either.
How dare you disrespect the masterpiece of cinema that Congo is.
C'mon, it's got Bruce Campbell! A gorilla that does sign language that's played by a woman in a gorilla suit! Laura Linney shooting a laser gun and saying great one liners like "put them back on the endangered species list"
Ok yeah, it's kinda trash. But I love it.
If they would've cast Bruce Campbell in the Dylan Walsh role instead of giving Bruce a one-scene-and-done, the flick would've had a lead who knew how to play against the ludicrousness.
Wait....Bruce Campbell is in it?!! How is this news to me? Iist find and watch this movie now.
Tim Curry is gold in this movie. "Stop eating my sesame cake!"
Tim Curry is gold in anything he is in.
Tim Curry is such gold in everything that you could have him play lead (the metal, not the most important character) and discover the secret alchemists have been searching for for centuries.
Overall I like your comment, but what did you want from the gorilla? A real gorilla that they taught sign language to?
Ugly gorillas. Ugly! Go away!
Mm yeah. I read the Reader's Digest version when I was a kid and bought a copy after 25 years or so. While it's still a cool techno thriller (and the tech has caught up with its vision), I was surprised how much Crichton fantasized about >!native women having sex with apes and gorillas!<.
I think the 13th Warrior was a better movie than Eaters of the Dead.
13th Warrior is a blast, and yep, it's better than the book.
The scene that shows him picking up bits and pieces of the language and then speaking it back to them is some of the best writing that's ever existed. The whole thing was done well, but that scene was a master class in screen writing.
Ridiculously underrated adventure film. Great cast, plot, dialog, pacing, ending.
Yeah, it just annoys me what a transparent riff on Beowulf it is.
Great Train Robbery is a fucking banger. Donald Sutherland.
Strangely enough, I enjoyed both the book and the movie versions of Timeline.
The Great Train Robbery is an awesome movie. Might be better than the book, actually.
I really njoyed assic Park.
What confuses is me how Lost World the novel never gets any hate. It is like Michael hired a high school student to write a sequel, it is awful in every imainable way, and the movie LostbWorld is betterbjust by existing.