I am forever bitter about Eragon…

    • FoundTheVegan@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      As soon as I heard about the movie I knew they were gonna milk the laser fight scenes for far more than they were worth.

      I know this is a total pipe dream that never would’ve happened, but I wish they either just focused on Bean or just made a philosophical epic out of Speaker for the Dead/Xenocide instead.

    • Mechanismatic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think it would have been better as a TV series. They glossed over the battle school battles too quickly. And in making it a series, they could have done Ender’s Shadow at the same time.

    • Nath@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Eragon was not a great book. It was a decent premise, the characters and story had potential. Given it was written by a teenager, it’s very impressive.

      But Mr Paolini must look back on it and cringe so bad. I’d actually like him to go back and reboot it now as a mature author.

      • ericbomb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean are you judging it as the target market?

        It was a young adult book. I refer to it as baby’s first high fantasy.

        Do 8-12 year old boys that will love super long high fantasy later in life probably still love it? I would bet money.

        But of course as adults we look down on the young adult book. Basically all young adult books seem not well made as adults.

        I know a handful of exceptions, but they stand out in my head as remarkable because they were exceptions.

  • shartworx@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    Wheel of Time is currently getting fanfic-ed into oblivion by the showrunners. I’m watching it anyway to see the characters come alive but some of it hurts.

    • Python@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m only on book 3 of WoT but decided to check out the first few episodes of the show anyways – I think some of the changes were wild and out of left field and some were very reasonable. Like skipping the first few towns of the journey makes sense, and introducing Tom at a slightly later point cause he’s kinda useless before that.

      I did stop watching and had an existential crisis when they showed Waygates just being basically Minecraft Nether Portals haha Oh and channeling looks SO GOOFY in the show!

    • sxt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s tragic really, I actually quite like everything apart from the script. I knew from the get that they would have to cut a lot of stuff and merge some books - which to be honest is fine, plenty of stuff that doesn’t need to go in - but I don’t understand their need to manufacture melodrama. It feels like every episode nothing happens but we’re still flying through the plot.

      Just a complete failure to match the tone/cadence of the books. So much time should be spent traveling and exploring the world, but the show chooses to sit around and have overdramatic unexplained scenes that won’t make any sense to someone who hasn’t read the books. I’m still not sure who the target audience is.

    • alcedine@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I gave up halfway through the Shadar Logoth episode (near the beginning of season 1).

      I could overlook the individual annoying little details, such as Lan complaining that his bath’s not hot enough, but the big issue I have is the tone. The books have an air of romantic optimism which, on the screen, ought to play out much more like Lord of the Rings than Game of Thrones. The series just discards that, going modern grimdark grittiness, and as a consequence something essential seems to be lost.

  • Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Not the best Crichton novel, but Sphere. The book was a fun read but not even the combined powers of Dustin Hoffman and Samuel L Jackson could make the movie adaptation palatable.

  • FoundTheVegan@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    World War Z.

    Book: Absolutely brilliant “documentary” from the survivors of a fictional zombie outbreak. Goes deep in to the details of high command and front line soldiers about how their initial assumptions were flawed and the ethical nightmare they were faced on a day to day basis. From wondering if they are killing infected people that could eventually be cured to strategically letting uninfected cities be used as zombie bait giving them time to prepare defenses elsewhere. All told way after the fact when the charcters have benefit of hindsight giving them lots of room to be reminest, express regret and throw shade at each other on why someone ELSES arrogance got people killed. Super funny writing and a nice tide clever book overall.

    Movie: Brad Pitt, playing a non-scientist, runs around and finds the cure for the zombie virus in like two days. Forgettable action movie that does nothing unique or interesting.

    Audiobook: Full voice casted by A list names who absolutely nail it. Faithful to the original text and lightyears ahead of. the movie. IMHO, it’s the best audiobook experince around.

    • Yuper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Fantastic book. Ok movie that seemed like it wasn’t related to the book at all. The scariest part is that the book accurately predicted how humans would react to an outbreak like Covid. Spoiler alert: not well.

    • WarmSoda@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      There’s a list of great ones.
      Shawshank.
      Fight Club.
      2001 (kinda cheating tho).
      Green Mile.
      The Godfather.
      American Psycho.

      • cmbabul@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Since you brought up Kubrick I’d say pretty much his whole filmography is better, with the Shining being the lone debatable exception

        • WarmSoda@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Oh definitely. These were just of the top of my head, there’s plenty of other good book movies.

        • Squids@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Kubrick…good adaptions

          You mean Stanley “I didn’t even read the entirety of A Clockwork Orange” Kubrick? Mister “Actually let’s age up the girl in Lolita and spend time focusing on how sexy she is”? That Kubrick? Dude completely ignores the point of both books and does the one thing the authors very specifically do not want you to do

          • stormtrooper@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah it seems like he just makes movies to his own crazy standards and doesn’t care too much about the source material.

          • cmbabul@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I should’ve phrased that differently, Kubrick doesn’t adapt the work well but the films he made are, in my opinion, better and more interesting artistically than the work they are based on. And he did read Clockwork but his version didn’t have the last chapter, and having read the full book I still think the film is more compelling. And I’ll cite Dr Strangelove and Paths of Glory as additional evidence, I also prefer his Lolita to Nabokov, even though he aged Dolores up, I’m pretty certain that’s because of standards and practices and he still managed to capture how rotten and disgusting a human Humbert is

            Just my opinion but adapting a work of literature perfectly to the screen isn’t always the best choice. Sometimes it is I’ll happily concede that, but they are different mediums so some things are changed out of necessity and others because of differences in artistic perspective or even societal sensibilities

      • cmbabul@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The book Jurassic Park is great, I’ll take the movie every time given the choice

        But these are all still exceptions, adaptations are usually best when they are either extremely book accurate or handled by a competent artist and not a studio or group of producers

  • stormtrooper@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I loved the Timeline book from Crichton, but one look at the trailer for the movie, I decided to not watch it. It looked really bad. 5.6 on imdb sort of backs that up I guess.

  • CritFail@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    All Terry Pratchett adaptations. I think Hogfather is my favourite but still feels awkward. None have matched the tone, wit, and character depth in the books quite right and just feels wrong. To me, it seems like the perfect book series for a faithful multi-season adaptation, but has so far eluded those who have tried.

  • Art35ian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Di Vinci Code was butchered, and I’m sorry to say it but Hanks was the wrong choice for Robert Langdon.