h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Has anyone else noticed that there are so many people who, having seen a movie, decide "that's it, know the story, don't need to read the book" or worse, "seen the movie, oh is there a book as well?". What has happened to people's intellect? Do they think that movies just materialise out of thin air? (I know some movies do, suggestions on the worst please). My favourite hate is the novelisation of the movie, when there's already a perfectly good novel that the movie was based on. (Blade Runner comes to mind as a classic example)
Please restore my faith in our ability to string worms together.
ta.

Or when the sequel book is actually a written sequel to the film, and nothing to do with the original book, ala Bladerunner. That is just awful. I understand that writers have to cater for the masses, but really, why bother when the masses are so dum?

wide

I agree - Blade Runner was based _very_ loosely on Dick's "Do Androids Dream...". I love both the film and the book, but in very different ways. One of the things that makes the book so great (to me) is the de-humanization of the humans...while the androids seem to be living life to the fullest and making the most of what little time they have, the humans rot away on a "kibble" filled and dust covered planet, worshiping false gods and the TV. You don't see any of that in the film, and a great deal of the story changed. But I can appreciate the art of Scott's vision--even though it seems to be more futuristic eye-candy than character interaction.

But in regard to your original point, fatJazzer, yes it does sadden me when I see people who have no intentions whatsoever of learning or appreciating where some films *come* from. One of my earliest experiences on this subject took place when I was in the second grade. My teacher believed very strongly in reading to her students every day. She read us a children's book titled "The Island of the Blue Dolphins", and I was so excited when I finally saw the film. I had it all set down in my head very carefully of what everything and everyone would look like...and then I encountered subjectivity for the first time. That's when this subject became my hobby--I own more complimenting book/film sets than anyone really should. I love both the written word and movies so much, and the differing views of both mediums, that I can't imagine other people not feeling the same way. When I encounter people who think every movie ever made is "original", I tend to nod politely and go find my friends with whom I can have an intelligent conversation.

Sometimes books, films, films based on books, books based on film, and the people who aren't willing to look further into one or the other can all be very disappointing. I try to appreciate the different views they all have to offer... no matter how scant they sometimes may be.

Well it's not quite "out of thin air", but someone told me that the movie "Convoy" was based on a song - this was apparently during the CB radio craze of the late 70's. Trying to make a movie out of (say) three verses and a chorus leaves a lot of room for filling in the gaps.

One other reason why film adaptions can diverge from books is simple commercial pressure. The best (worst?)example I can think of is "The bonfire of the vanities". Great book by Tom Wolfe, potentially good cast in Tom Hanks and Bruce Willis. The book's main character is the broker (Hanks), who is investigated by the journalist (Willis). Except at the time the film was made, Willis was the bigger star, so the whole film was skewed in his direction.

I'm new to this so bear with me.
I would like to put the case of 'The Third Man'.
From a suggestion made to Graeme Greene who then wrote the screenplay, from which the film was made, Greene then writing the novel.
a collaboration which produced both an outstanding film and book.
Raver

But there are some books who NEVER should have been made films of: For instance, "Oliver Twist" by Charles Dickens. I've seen so many versions of that, and I can't say I have ever found ONE who meets the standards of that classic. Nor should "Hannibal" by Thomas Harris; A film could never enclose all those fantasies, those feelings the book has. But now, "Silence of the Lambs" has to be one of the history's greatest filmed book! That was realy spinetingling! (They should never tried to make that following)

Er...that would be "Graham" Greene.