BellaOnline Forums Books and Music Horror Literature Faithful book to film transfers

Very good point Justin, length really matters when it comes to book to film transfers. Hellraiser is certainly a good example, but I also think that seeing as the actual author directed the movie, you got a much clearer vision of the book. If it was directed by, say, Wes Craven, you would have HIS vision of Clive Barker's book.

Another good recent example (non-horror) of this is Sin City. Frank Miller's contribution was invaluable in making the movie what it was.

I have to disagree with you disagreement. <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

"Misery" was one of "the best". But that's because none of King's books have really translated well to the large screen. I can name a few abysmal failures: "Lawnmower Man" (Where the heck did that come from? - I think they 1 scene in the movie that sort of resembled the actual short story.), "The Running Man", "Thinner". His books actually did better as the TV miniseries; "The Stand" being the best of those I think, or his remake of "The Shining" - much more faithful to the book (of course it was lacking Jack Nicholson! - Ah well).

Hey, have y'all heard, they are going to turn "The Dark Tower" series into a comic book series (or whetever the heck they're calling them these days!)

I will look; however, I am not remembering McDowell...This is the one with Clair Bloom and Russ Tamblyn(Amber's father)....it was the first and by far the best.( I sat in the lobby with my fingers in my ears---my date was thrilled!) No actual gore(thank G*d) but more "in your head" stuff which I find much more effective than a high body count or body parts flung hither and yon across the landscape.

I did enjoy INTERVIEW and agree with your take on QUEEN. I have read all Rice's books. I would like to see The Mayfair Witches brought to the screen as well..I am not a King fan. I think of him as the Barbara Cartland of horror, but hey! that is just me <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

MISERY was actually a good film. As mentioned, it was much less darker than the book, but still an entertaining couple of hours. Of course, Kathy Bates did well in both that and DELORES CLAIBORNE, which I also enjoyed. Perhaps these were successful because they concentrated on a few characters, instead of a bunch of characters and a lot of scares.

Another popular thing with movies these days seems to be the "remake." For example, AMITYVILLE HORROR, originally based on the book by Jay Anson and adapted for the film in the 70s, was of course recently redone. If you've seen them, which you like better?

EXCORCIST, now that was a good one; although, the book scared me far more than the movie. BUT as someone mentioned the old brain can come up with much more personally horrific self inflicted revelations than someone else's film version of their own hard fought terrors brought to light...

CLOCKWORK ORANGE: Enuf said!

Roni,

THE EXORCIST was certainly a successful movie adaptation of the book. It is interesting to note that the movie seems often far more celebrated today than Blatty's pivotal work; both have contributed to the horror genre in their own individual ways.

I doubt that many people even know that there was a book that came before the movie! Especially in our generation and after.

I just happened to stumble upon the book in my dad's library one day, and that was the first I knew of it.

Actually, I do believe that "The Exorcist" was serialized in a magazine prior to it''s book form publication...Cosmo maybe? I know it was a woman's magazine. But that is probably before any of you were born...

Justin, I meant to reply to this, but couldn't remember where the question was!

I actually liked the remake of "Amytiville Horror" better than the original. The first was too... 70's. It was kind of psychadelic and you didn't really understand what was going on.

I thought they did a much better job in the second movie of relating the tale and the possession.

I think King's "Dreamcatcher" made the transfer pretty well. There was a version of "Needful Things" that I think was actually better than the book, but it was almost a parody of the book. It was very well done.