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?
American Psycho. In the book, the satire is hammered home until you're bored to tears.
That book is like an endurance marathon of ‘Jesus Christ, I don’t know if I can actually finish this.’ Glamorama is exactly the same. The American Psycho film got its point across so much better just by being subtle and implying or using the violence sparingly. Plus Bale is just hypnotising to watch, and reading the book Patrick is hard to stick with as some pages are just lists of stuff, lists and lists of stuff.
Totally agree…overcooked the repetition, got sick fed-up of the reams and reams of designer label namechecking. Yes, I get it - the 80s were my forming years and we all knew a fair few yuppified dickheads - but that doesn’t a good book necessarily make. Overrated pish…sorry Brett!
Other way around for me. I wouldn't call the book subtle but that works for the overall feeling of excess in the book.
I agree the murder/rape scenes are terrible. Like I've never gone to reread the book and it feels weird to recommend to someone they are so bad. I think they do have some value to the plot, them being less disgusting and in your face, rather than being sheer exploitation but nothing subtle about it.
The film felt like it was just more silly and superficial though. I didn't dislike it, Bale is fantastic. But it didn't make a huge impression on me. The book certainly left an impression. The film entertained me, the book fucked me up.