Quote:
Originally Posted by jacog
So to all parasites and their kin... suck my rosy ass.
|
Chill man. We get that you feel passionately about this. No need to go over the top.
Quote:
Originally Posted by After a brisk nap
The responsibility of a director making a film based on a book is not to "put the book up on the screen". It is to make a great movie.
|
I can agree with this to a certain extent but, if they do make something that isn't faithful to the book, should they still say "based on". In fact, if (as is often the case) they make something almost totally unlike the book should it even have the same name?
To my mind, if you're making something with the title of a specific book then you're implying that the book is what will be on screen. Chances are you are relying on the name to attract people in. If the film you make is nothing like the book isn't that a bit dishonest? I have no problem with the idea of films "inspired by" books (i.e. taking an idea or a world vision and then doing other things with it) The director displays their creative vision but without giving the false impression of what the end result will be.
Anyway, if we're going to carry on this discussion then it would probably be best to set up a separate thread. This one is supposed to be about films that were cancelled/butchered(in the sense of having parts cut out) or never made. Not ones that we disagree with the way they were made.
