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.

Edited September 20, 201213 yr by elric

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.