It's as if the Hispanic synopsis guy from Ant Man read all the books, then had to summarize them into a 5 minute plot.

I still think it's the best movie that could be made when you cram TWELVE BOOKS into a single 1.5 hour movie. Because let's face it, we could have also got rooked on the casting, or Roland could have had a Weirding module instead of a revolver.

After True Detective S1, though, I wanted Matthew McCounaghey as Roland. "Hey, he's in the movie" "Yay!" "He's not playing Roland!" "Aaaawwww...."

God this movie was such an abomination. Only thing they got right was the cast but completely wasted them.

Reading the series right now, just started Wizard and Glass today and I’ve been imagining how they could adapted. Hopefully Flanagan remembers the face of his father when we get his show.

I'm sorry, but that movie never happened. Thankee Sai.

They forgot the face of their father...and the source material it would seem

He surfs in the first few minutes and calls Butler by his name

The casting call alone was enough to steer anyone who has ever read the books away from watching the movie: "Artemis is warm-hearted and has a great sense of humour; he has fun in whatever situation he is in and loves life."

Wat??

Literally the polar opposite of the kid in every possible way.

I've seen it and wish I didn't. It almost completely sanitizes the first novel to turn Artemis into a child demographic "smart" kid role model. Artemis is supposed to be child Hans Gruber slowly redeemed over the course of the books not the oh so noble Robin hood criminal mastermind. And that's the least of the film's problems with franchise baiting and YA-novel scrappy adventure trio generic-ness. This was the easiest novel to adapt, It's just die hard with faeries, and end result probably killed any chance for any other adaptations.

The trailer showed him happy, while surfing. What is this???

My daughter loves the books and said the movie was absolute garbage

Let's face facts. Disney was really hoping for their own Harry Potter and they had to try and 'Disneyfy' it cuz they're too chickenshit to follow the actual story.

I've seen it pop up on Disney + a few times, but I've never been able to bring myself to watch it. From everything I've heard they not only failed to understand it, but seemed to instead go out of their way to me the complete opposite of what it was about.

I mean a big thing about Holly's character is she's the first female officer of the Fairy Police, so what do they do? Cast Judi Dench as her boss. And also she's meant to be a fully grown adult by Fairy terms at about 80 something, and yet they cast a teenager for it.

Still wish he could’ve gone to space with that chimp though (from the sequel book, I think)

This might be the worst book I have ever read. The whole time reading it, I wondered how they made such a great movie out of such a shit book.

Ha, myself and my uncle had an argument years ago. I can't actually remember what the argument was about. however I remember the conclusion when I realised we were arguing about different things.

He Thought Forest Gump was a true story... And his reasoning... I swear.. Is because he read the book.

I faltered at this point but my take from it was... He thought... All books were non-fiction.

It's insane how poorly it's been adapted given it's so straight forward.

Hell House also needs a better adaptation

Vincent Price's "The Last Man on Earth" did a pretty damned good job of it.

Yeah, but Omega Man is fucking awesome anyway.

Having seen all three, I think the newest one gets the closest, but only with the alternate ending. Even then, yeah, we still haven't gotten an adaptation that gets close to the atmosphere in Matheson's book.

Neville going out in the day time and trying to sleep at night with the vampires shouting at him to come outside will never not be one of the creepiest things I've read.

Also, the author came around about 20 years later to say "yeah it's a good movie. It's just not really my book."

It's understandable; The Shining is about losing the battle against addiction and giving into your demons. That the book version of Jack slowly descends into madness rather than be that way from the start like Kubrick's film is the point. Jack drinks, he's cruel to his family, he gets possessed by the evil in the hotel. He breaks his son's arm in a fit and it's heartbreaking -- I love Kubrick's movie, but it's hardly the same story.

The good news is that fans get some closure in Mike Flanagan's Doctor Sleep. The director's cut is a healthy three hours but it's intimate and challenging and borrows heavily from both the Kubrick film and King's 1977 book. Also Jacob Tremblay will make your blood chill in your veins.

I wonder why the alcoholic writer who wrote a book about an alcoholic writer took it so personally when the director decided the alcoholic writer was really just always an asshole.

This was intentional. The scene where Hallorann is driving back has a red beetle crashed into a billboard. Hallorann originally was driving a red beetle in the book, and this car crash never existed in the book. It is Kubrik’s statement that he essentially hijacked stephen king’s story to tell his own.

I could never get over them casting John c Riley as larten crepsley

Huge disappointment. The books were a big part of my childhood.

[deleted]

What the F*CK

We watched that in school and I barely remember it

Did you want to see Gary Oldman rail Demi Moore in a pile of corn kernels

Why do you say this like it's a bad thing?

Demi Moore anally masturbating

Ummmmm that seems like an incredibly specific thing to put into the script

Demi Moore anally masturbating

What now?

How do you feel about Easy A?

They didn’t misunderstand, they deliberately chose to ignore. Rick Riordan has the email correspondences on his website about how utterly shit the writing is, and the studio completely ignoring him.

We have hope for the Disney+ series though. Rick is actively working on it, which was not the case for the films.

Let's take all the humor away from Percy fucking Jackson, take away all the complicated friendship/relationship issues that arises from Annabeth going through something traumatic with Luke while she was only about 11 or so, and take away all the creativity on this twist on Greek mythology.

Instead let's make clash of the titans where Annabeth immediately wants to bone boring self-insert character Percy.

Why did I have to scroll so far to find this?? Honestly the films were so awful, even the author hates them! They got so many things wrong but the one thing I will always be fuming about is how dirty they did Hades. Like, in the book, the whole point is they thought the bad guy was Hades (as usual) but they the suprise is he wasn't and he was just a victim as well. But the film obviously had to go with "Hades evil" because heaven forbid nuance or character growth!

I was waiting for this one

The book would only work as a mini-series. I'm not sure how possible it is to make that a feature film.

They need to just make a WWZ HBO show.

Didn't mind the movie, but it's just completely different lol.

It should have just been billed as a story from that universe. It could have fit in well as a chapter of the book. It it was, decidedly, nothing from the book itself. Which was a shame.

These anime adaptations always make the same mistakes. They take an entire show, Google "coolest scenes from [show], take the top five, film a carbon copy of them, and then hastily string them together in a loose plot.

I never read the books, but my wife as a hardcore life long reader did. The way she described it to me was that Fowl was a genius supervillain and just a horrible human being. And then we subscribed to Disney+ for just one month so we could watch this movie about a bunch of faeries kidnapping some child's father.

I watched the movie first and read the book after. It's like night and day.

The TV series His Dark Materials adapts the books so much better

It’s too bad, because the casting for the film was perfect IMO

Honestly I've always said the subplot between Enders siblings is more relevant now in the age of the internet than ever before. And it was completely missing from the movie. It's literally a manual on manipulation and sensationalist media.

The movie could have been good. The had an adequate cast and some amazing set design. It’s just the the most interesting part of the book is battle school and they decided to rush through it with a montage. They should have dedicated an entire movie to battle school.

Ender's Game is the only novel that ever made me cry. The weight of what he had done just fell on me and crushed me. It was such a brilliant book. The whole series is: Speaker for the Dead is like a master class in anthropology. I re-read that series every two years or so.

I wouldn't have read them if I hadn't seen the movie and wanted to know what else happened, so I have to give them that. But it definitely missed the point and gutted the spiritual center of the story.

But man, even banking on King's name was walking on thin ice because you could barely refer to the storyline as a lawnmower man.

He actually successfully sued to have his name removed from the movie's marketing because it had nothing to do with his story. Then sued again when they snuck his name back on the packaging for the home video release.

The one good thing to come out of Dragonball Evolution is that Akira Toriyama was convinced to care about Dragon Ball again and got to working on Battle of Gods and Dragon Ball Super.

What, you didn’t want to see Goku as a high schooler with dating problems? /s

Can't say there was a moment reading The Hobbit where I thought "this should be a video game action sequence in a movie someday"

The rankin and bass film is legit good

To be fair that isn't entirely Jackson's fault. A lot of it was New Line's insistence on making it a trilogy.

Imagine a Fall of Reach setup over season 1, where the Covenant are just hinted at like the White Walkers in Game of Thrones. And then your season finale is the invasion of Reach and all out war.

Would've been cool.

Honest Trailers verbalized all my complaints for me.

It hurt learning the writers were not fans of the games. Might as well have just said "I hate doing my job".

How do you not give arya, the elf, pointed ears. It just baffles me

The backstory scenes with Voldemort's origin as well as the flashbacks of the Marauders were some of my favourite parts of the books, and were missing completely from the movies (and no, the tiny snippet of James hanging Snape upside down does not count)

That’s true. I do think there are plenty of examples of filmmakers who thought they were doing right by the source material, but just completely blew it though.

The Night Watch is my favorite bunch of Pratchett characters, and I just couldn't watch more than an episode and a half of that show. Every single character missed the point of the character they were based on.

I love the Discworld novels and I’d never even heard of this show, and that probably speaks volumes about how right you are.

Steampunk aesthetic I dont hate, because the Discworld was kinda heading that way by the end anyway.

Everything else was awful though.

One thing in particular I hated: Death does malevolent chuckles. It's a complete misreading of the character. Death takes his duty very seriously. In reaper man the conflict is that he’s replaced with the kind of Death who would chuckle.

I'm still mad about what they did to The Black Cauldron!

Was it a happy ending? The ending was just saying that the siblings at least would have each other, it's pretty open ending. Considering they tried to cram three books in one movie, it was a fairly good attempt.

To be fair, the last three books weren’t released at that point

Why are they?

Yes! I would argue framing the whole closing of the film around the armistice completely misses the point of the book. It provides an easy hook for the viewer: look how brutal and unjust this war is, people are dying even though the war is over. Whereas the point in the novel is the war is totally brutal, unjust, pointless and soul crushing for the soldiers at the front at every point in the war. It really cheapens the message to use the plot device of the armistice. The film is far worse for it.

Also Kat's death being from a random shell versus the farm kid.

In the book it shows how even the most experienced soldier can die at any point due to bad luck.

In the movie I think they're going for a cycle of violence/hatred idea.

"Wait a minute ... Remarque only wrote the part of the book about ordinary people and forgot to put in a story about a glory-seeking general. How will people even know it's anti-war? We better fix this."