i get the problem with adaptation , that why i brought "Sleeper" as a GOOD example of adapting a book even that it reallky changed the details it actually was true to the spirit of the story, or why i dont whine about omitting my LoTR most loved char -> Tom Bambadil, altough the scene where Merry and Pipin 'trick' the Ent into acting against Saruman is a prime example of the kind of adaptation i hate . since it contradict the story just for 'let make them look more cool , yeh dude' attidute (was it that hard to remain true to the story spirit by simply having Treebird say something like "harmmpp it even worse that i fear , we will need to act" and omitting the Ent concleve -> same screen time NO disrespect to the story)

other good example is "Jeckil" mini serie about Dr Jeckil/Mr Hide in today world , a mini serie which remain true to the CONCEPT of the original story while presenting a very fresh and interesting interpertation of it.

 

my problem is with adaptation who ignore the original main concept

 

examples:

1st Hulk movie -> hulk (primal rage personify) doing meditation !!!

X-Men -> Magneto sacrificing other mutant due to unwillingness to risk himself (geek moment: in x-man 200 he actually surrender due to cousing Kity Pride harm)

Superman Return -> peeping tom Super-Man / Superman lifting a CONTINENT made of KRIPTONITE !!!!!!

 

i dont mind ppl doing their own interpertation but i do demand that they honor the original story.

New trailer is out. It awsome

Slightly off topic, but with regards to adaptations, what do people think of the Bourne adaptations? I like both the films and the books, but they're hardly the same story!

 

Back on topic, I don't like the idea of including extra material into the Hobbit. I think that the Hobbit is a better story than LoTR, but adding stuff in is just going to dilute the story.