Aw man, you stole mine! Dang.ItouKaiji said:
Others? Hmm... some of Stephen King's less horror-based work, such as Stand By Me, Shawshank Redemption, and the Green Mile.
Adaptations better than the originals
- Thread starter Bob_McMillan
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Others? Hmm... some of Stephen King's less horror-based work, such as Stand By Me, Shawshank Redemption, and the Green Mile.
I'm going with the Razor's Edge. The only thing wrong with the book is that it doesn't have Bill Murray.
This, this so hard. The first anime is way better than the manga and, by extension, Brotherhood.FPLOON said:
Lol, I couldn't watch those movies either.Casual Shinji said:
I do remember the show started off... not in the best quality, but I think it improved shortly after. It's been awhile since I've seen it now though.
You know what? I have forgotten all about the Skull Knight and Guts's back story. I'm going to watch and read it all again probably next weekend now because I feel like I don't know what I'm talking about anymore.Fox12 said:
It's a great opinion to get lynched by. But the only nice thing I can reliably say about Brotherhood is that the animation is nice.FPLOON said:
Outright superior
-Revenge of the Sith (as in, the novelization)
-Apocalypse Now (as it was based on Heart of Darkness)
-Henry V, Othello (a bit unfair, as they follow the plays word for word, but combining those words with acting, and Kenneth Brannagh, I think these adaptations are excellent)
-Catching Fire (film adaptation)
Arguably the following:
-Resident Evil (novelization of the first film)
-Lord of the Rings trilogy (Jackson)
-Matilda (film adaptation)
Liked equally, but for different reasons:
-Game of Thrones (TV series)
-Starship Troopers (original movie)
-The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (film adaptation)
-Revenge of the Sith (as in, the novelization)
-Apocalypse Now (as it was based on Heart of Darkness)
-Henry V, Othello (a bit unfair, as they follow the plays word for word, but combining those words with acting, and Kenneth Brannagh, I think these adaptations are excellent)
-Catching Fire (film adaptation)
Arguably the following:
-Resident Evil (novelization of the first film)
-Lord of the Rings trilogy (Jackson)
-Matilda (film adaptation)
Liked equally, but for different reasons:
-Game of Thrones (TV series)
-Starship Troopers (original movie)
-The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (film adaptation)
I think you mean my first, since you were the first one I talked to about the 2003 anime being the better version around here...Nazulu said:
I can't argue with that... Brotherhood did look stunning... And gave us this:crimson5pheonix said:
http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m6xbs9t74l1qb75mc.gif
Here's a question I have, what the hell was up with the animation in Sacred Star of Milos?FPLOON said:
Fear and loathing in Las Vegas. The script of the movie is very faithful to the book, but they have the advantage of being able to actually play all the music mentioned in the book (except sympathy for the devil as they couldn't get the rights). Also the acting and the visuals are just fantastic.
Are we turning this into a FMA:Brotherhood hate thread? Cause I thought the 2003 anime was far superior.FPLOON said:
I mostly talking about the whole Army Propaganda and Power Thing is going on with the books. If you are part of the Military, then you are "normal". If not, then simple you are nothing. Also the army is the law, so if you do something stupid that it is related with them, you are f*cked. They are like Space-Nazis.MarsAtlas said:
The first movie nearly touched this subject and the second movie didn't bother at all.
However the 3rd movie, you can see clearly the film maker wanted to make you feel that the Army actually is very, very WRONG. It had been shown a lot more than the first movie and more clear.
Starship Troopers was a gigantic letdown for me. The director only focused on subtext and managed to completely forget the story aspect of the movie. There is so many inteligent parts of the movie and i love those parts, but the storyline is paper thin and the characters flatter still. I loved how it understood jingoism and the part were Rico defends the invasion by stating "I'm from Rio and I say, let's kill 'em all" hit the jackpot, just replace it with Iraq and you've got America in a nutshell: an angry, stupid boy that wants to break stuff. How could the movie go so wrong, it came from the Robocop guys, for lords sake. They made one of the best stories in any action movie.SweetShark said:
Total Recall is a much better candidate for best adaptation. It also came from the same director.
Here, here! The original trilogy skips on everyone and their mother being given a song-and-dance number except for when the effect is guaranteed to be poignant (Merry's song at Minas Tirith, for instance), and most of all, we don't have any Tom Bombashit nonsense to push through.Silvanus said:
The main problem with the books is that they're written by a war-scarred linguist and philologist trying and failing at putting suitable bedtime stories together for his kids. One moment's all "Whee, lookit the hobbits being all whimsical and shit!" and then the next you've got Nazgûl being described as post-traumatic hallucinations carved out of undead flesh and bones.
Um, consistency, Tolkien? Please?
Watchmen. I don't really like the graphic novel, the characters are all too unlikeable and the ending makes no sense and there are too many wordy passages that don't add anything valuable to the story. The film was far superior as far as I'm concerned.
On risk of being brutally murdered (I feel a FNAF jumpscare featuring a horde of elven-eared book purists coming up), it's both A Song of Ice and Fire / Game of Thrones and Lord of the Rings for me.
ASoIaF: I liked the first three books, then master short story writer Martin kind of lost his thread a bit. In the series, the showrunners get to fix a lot of that and make everything flow a bit better. It's sort of a reverse LOST situation where the show didn't have the luxury of knowing where actually it was going, unlike ASoIaF where Martin has already tried the waters.
LotR: Don't get me wrong, without Tolkien, there wouldn't be a fantasy genre as we know it. The man has created a memorable, epic world with incredible detail and inhuman feats of world design (languages come to mind). I do however prefer Jackson's pictures to Tolkien's prose - that's not to say Tolkien is a bad writer, only that he tends to go on tangents that make his books a fairly unenjoyable read as his "world before plot before character" prioritization comes through in his writing style as well.
ASoIaF: I liked the first three books, then master short story writer Martin kind of lost his thread a bit. In the series, the showrunners get to fix a lot of that and make everything flow a bit better. It's sort of a reverse LOST situation where the show didn't have the luxury of knowing where actually it was going, unlike ASoIaF where Martin has already tried the waters.
LotR: Don't get me wrong, without Tolkien, there wouldn't be a fantasy genre as we know it. The man has created a memorable, epic world with incredible detail and inhuman feats of world design (languages come to mind). I do however prefer Jackson's pictures to Tolkien's prose - that's not to say Tolkien is a bad writer, only that he tends to go on tangents that make his books a fairly unenjoyable read as his "world before plot before character" prioritization comes through in his writing style as well.
Jaws and The Godfather are perennial examples of classic movies being made from schlocky pulp fiction. My personal example is Cloud Atlas the movie versus the book. I felt cinema did a much better job of conveying the themes and meta plot across the six vignettes that make up the story (the immediacy of film made it much easier). Contrariwise, I've only seen the first episode of the new Jonathan Strange and Mister Norrell, and as much as I liked it, it is inferior to the novel (books having the luxury of being able to digress into massive footnotes and description for the mere fun of it).