konter_j8902 said:Twilight saga is awesome...
Nurse. Oh Nurse! It seems konter_j8902 has gotten out of bed again!
konter_j8902 said:Twilight saga is awesome...
Hatman said:Wario likes that movie .
KRONOS TOO???? THATS THE MAIN VILLAN GUY!!!!! ._.hipoke said:99% of movies from books are on par or worse then the book. There are a few exceptions though.
The Shining is one. The Lightning Thief was horrible. I mean Ares, and Chronos are both gone...
Hehehe, Stupid Mario Brothers =P
Hatman said:KRONOS TOO???? THATS THE MAIN VILLAN GUY!!!!! ._.
*nukes the Lightning Thief movie over 9000 times*
Setzer (Harry) said:Nurse. Oh Nurse! It seems konter_j8902 has gotten out of bed again!
Was not completely horrible compared to what I've read, but the movie made the thing completely unsavagable. -_-Zenith said:Horrible books turned into even worse movies:
Eragon
Zyflair said:Anyone thinks that the Lord of the Rings was at least a good attempt?
Zyflair said:Was not completely horrible compared to what I've read, but the movie made the thing completely unsavagable. -_-
Anyone thinks that the Lord of the Rings was at least a good attempt?
dmaster said:But yeah most books to movies suck. The only ones that are actually watchable are The Lord of the Rings.
dmaster out.
._.Oboy170 said:The lightning thief also cut out the Chimera, Cerberus, and Clorice (I think that was her name it was the one daughter of Ares).
Skylands said:What do you think about it?
I think movies should work on their own merit, and whether they complement the original source is almost irrelevant. For example, the Wizard of Oz movie is necessarily a very different work than the book on which it is based. It doesn't simply try to recreate Baum's story on film. The movie exists as a separate work of art, which is as it should be. I'm sure there are exceptions to this rule, movies that successfully mirror the written source, although I can't think of any offhand. Obviously, some books lend themselves to film better than others.