Just want y'alls opinion on the best book to movie venture.
My top five:
1. Shawshank redemption (unbelievably true to the boook)
2. Stand by Me( The body)
3. Catch-22 (Allen Arkin in his prime)
4. Fear and Loathing (this has been thoroughly discussed on this board)
5. Lord of the Rings
I agree with Shawshank Redemption and Stand by Me/The body I would have to add Dream Catcher if we are talking about Steven King books to film. A bad adaptation was Hearts in Atlantis. BAD BAD BAD, if you had read the book first.
The best one I've seen is probably "Fight Club." Dead on.
One of the worst I've seen is "The Shining." I know it's one of the better King adaptations (quality-wise, not accuracy), but it just didn't have the same impact on me as the book did.
I agrre with you on Hearts in Atlantis. The book was pretty good. The movie was dumb. I didn't read Dream Catcher but I thought the movie was terrible. As far as King movies go, "The Green Mile" was pretty true to the book. Tom Hanks was a little overexposed by that point, however.
The original 'Hellraiser' wasn't too bad (I know, out of ALL the books made into movies I choose that one. Not Tolstoy, London, Hemmingway but Clive Barker?)
I have some misgivings on 'Shawshank' though. Once upon a time, it was a great film - then they started showing it on TNT 3 times a week (I am genuinely surprised that it was not somehow made into a TV series - but I digress).
I have recently discovered that women in general tend to mention 'Shawshank' as one of their favorite movies in order to gain favor in male suitors. And if you think that I am generalizing, go ahead and ask a female what her favorite part of the movie was, I guarantee she'll say the part when the Warden pulls back the poster revealing the hole. It's another nice little litmus test.
Are you talking about that Nick Cage piece of crap? Any movie where the best scene is a car accident, isn't worth mentioning. And WTF with all the credits to some brother that never existed?
Can't say I liked Adaptation - So, does the book really matter?
Unless it was a sucky book - then I guess the book to film relationship might be a good one (in that it was faithful).
I haven't read the book, but Chuck Barris' 'Confessions of a Dangerous Mind' was a surprisingly good movie. I say surprisingly for two reasons; 1) Clooney directed it; and 2) Charlie Kaufmann wrote it - and I find him a little pretentious.
I kinda liked Maximum Overdrive. To me it was a comedy more that a horror. The lines did suck, like when that guy came outta nowhere and said "WHAT THE F*CK IS GOING ON HERE". said it sooo stupid. That movie did have mostly crap, but it was good.
As soon as I saw this thread title, I immediately thought 'Catch-22'. I'm surprised someone else shares that thought. What an all-star cast...and it was dead on with almost everything. Granted they couldn't do every chapter for every character and such. I think that since the book was so dialogue oriented, it made it very adaptable to the movie version.
I also have to say that 'Dr. Zhivago' was a great movie as well as book...I'm a sucker for David Lean.