Twitter Tumblr FlickrFacebookContact me
Now 2019 Previous Articles Road Essays Road Reviews Author Title Source Age Genre Series Format Inclusivity LGBTA Portfolio Artwork

Recent posts

Month in review

Reviews:
Alphabet Mystery by Audrey Wood
The Best Friend I Ever Had by David Nuffer
Beyond the Blue Event Horizon by Frederik Pohl
Black Rainbow by Barbara Michaels
The Bomb That Followed Me Home by Cevin Soling
Catalog by Eugene Mirabelli
The Chemist by Janson Mancheski
Culture Shock! California by Mark Cramer
The Dead Fathers Club by Matt Haig
Duck on a Bike by David Shannon
Duck for President by Doreen Cronin
Heechee Rendezvous by Frederik Pohl
How Do Dinosaurs Go to School? by Jane Yolen and Mark Teague
The Importance of Being Earnest by Oscar Wilde
Jane Austen Ruined My Life by Beth Pattillo
Keeping Hannah Waiting by Dave Clarke
Little Heathens by Mildred Armstrong Kalish
Love in 90 Days by Diana Kirschner
The Night We Buried Road Dog by Jack Cady
Of Dreams and Reality by Frank L. Johnson
Our Man in Havana by Graham Greene
Purplicious by Elizabeth and Victoria Kann
School Days by B. G. Hennessy
The Secret of Lost Things by Sheridan Hay
Sister Margaret by Rhonda Parrish
A Surprise for Rosie by Julia Rawlinson
Texas Bake Sale by Charles Coleman Finlay
There's a Wolf at the Door by Zoë B. Alley
Tiger Burning Bright by Theodora DuBois
Venice by Adrian Stokes and John Piper
Winding Broomcorn by Mario Milosevic
The Whole Shebang by Timothy Ferris

Ulysses:
Episode 2: Nestor: Kif
Episode 3: Proteus: Georgia Nicholson
Episode 4: Calypso: Parasites Lost
Episode 5: The Lotus Eaters: Down to the River to Pray

Miscellaneous:
Historical Fiction

Previous month

Rating System

5 stars: Completely enjoyable or compelling
4 stars: Good but flawed
3 stars: Average
2 stars: OK
1 star: Did not finish

Reading Challenges

Canadian Book Challenge: 2018-2019

Beat the Backlist 2019



Privacy policy

This blog does not collect personal data. It doesn't set cookies. Email addresses are used to respond to comments or "contact us" messages and then deleted.


Comments for Weekly Geeks 2009-10: Bad Movies

Weekly GeeksWeekly Geeks 2009-10: Bad Movies: 03/14/09

Worst movie adaptations: The recent release of Watchmen based on the graphic novel by Alan Moore got me thinking about what I thought were the worst movie adaptations of books. What book or books did a director or directors completely ruin in the adaptation(s) that you wish you could "un-see," and why in your opinion, what made it or them so bad in contrast to the book or books?

It's funny to me how the Weekly Geeks theme will so often dovetail with a recent post of mine. This week's worst movie adaptation comes right after I wrote about one of my favorite movie adaptations, Our Man in Havana which is finally available on DVD in the states.

I have to admit that I'm pretty forgiving with adaptations either books into films or the other way around as films into books. I expect things to change between media. Films and books have different conventions for their storytelling and of course different strengths and weaknesses. Films for the most part rely on images followed very closely by sounds but you can still have a good story in a silent film or with a modern day film muted (try it some time!). Books for the most part rely on language: puns, dialect, vocabulary and so forth. Of course they can have illustrations and the graphic novel (or manga or comic book) comes as close as one can to being as visual as film.

With those differences in mind, I delight in seeing a film take a book and run with it even if it's in a completely different direction. The ones that typically bother me the most are the ones that try to be completely faithful to the original novel (the Harry Potter films, for example).

In fact the only film adaptation I can think of where I had loved the book and wanted to see one thing and was completely disappointed to the point of walking out (not a good thing since it was a film class in grad school!) is Stanley Kubrick's version of Lolita. Lolita is of course the story of a pedophile but its told in flashback from a man who has been defeated by his final conquest. Part of her power over him he attributes to the excesses of American consumer culture. In other words, Humbert Humbert was a means to an end for Lolita getting all the crap she wanted. Worst of all from H. H's point of view, Lolita's actions are treated as normal behavior for any ambitious American young woman.

All of that subtext about American culture being more depraved than that of a sexual predators is missing from the film. It's not even hinted at. Not one iota. Sure, they go through the motions of getting through the plot at the right times but whole thing is just Kubrick's voyeurism playing through Humbert Humbert. The entire middle section of the book is missing and there is nothing new or different to take its place.

I swear the man could only make one kind of movie no matter which book he started with. Sometimes he managed to find a book forgiving enough to blend with his one and only way of directing (2001 and The Shining) but most of the time he made absolutely crap that was too long and so oozing of his grand self styled view of himself as an auteur that his films lack any sense of individuality at the expense of telling a good story.



Comments (0)








Name:
Email (won't be posted):
Blog URL:
Comment:

Comment #1: Saturday, March, 14, 2009 at 17:45:30

unfinishedperson

So tell me, how do you really feel? ;) I used the word "crap" in my post too, and I agree with you on this one. The punch of the book was completely taken out. Of course, a book that brilliant, it's hard to capture it on film anyway.



Comment #2: Saturday, March 14, 2009 at 17:52:03

Pussreboots

I think it's funny how many of us have picked on Kubrick for our examples. There's at least three of us the last time I checked.



Comment #3: Saturday, March, 14, 2009 at 17:50:17

sari

I have not seen the movie Lolita and now am glad. I would have shuddered the whole way through. The only redeeming theme in the books is the underlying metaphor on our over indulgent culture.

I thought visually 2001 was stunning, but still think the book is much much better.



Comment #4: Saturday, March 14, 2009 at 17:58:11

Pussreboots

I agree with you on 2001 the book versus the movie. I wish too that 2010 the book hadn't been so close to the movie and thus cutting out the fact that they had gone to an entirely different planet in the first book.



Comment #5: Saturday, March, 14, 2009 at 18:43:24

coffee

Watchmen is a visual and psychological cornucopia -- definitely worth watching



Comment #6: Saturday, March 14, 2009 at 18:02:42

Pussreboots

Maybe when the hype dies down.



Comment #7: Saturday, March, 14, 2009 at 19:16:07

Ali

Interesting post. I was never able to finish the book Lolita, and haven't seen the movie, but you've convinced me that Kubrick missed the point entirely when he did the adaptation.



Comment #8: Saturday, March 14, 2009 at 18:05:10

Pussreboots

Kubrick never tried to be on point.



Comment #9: Sunday, March, 15, 2009 at 15:18:07

Melanie

I haven't seen either version of Lolita but i have read the book. I do also prefer the book of The Shining to the movie but consider the movie pretty good on its own.

As for watching a modern film without the sound, try Pan's Labyrinth. as it's in spanish you can also just turn off the subtitles and still enjoy the music. It's a beautiful movie and uses so many fairy tale conventions that it's easy to follow.



Comment #10: Saturday, March 21, 2009 at 20:34:10

Pussreboots

I speak Spanish well enough to follow along without subtitles but I do like to watch anime without subtitles just to enjoy the episode or the film without necessarily understanding everything that is said.