Changes in stories when books are made into movies

[Bridgette C 2]

I think producing the movie based purely from a book is costly, but it's worth it. I do prefer movies to be produced based on the book's real content because it's better. But if a change was good, then better be it. But what I didn't like when changinh the content of the book into a movie was Percy Jackson series especially the first and second adaptation where there were scenes that are incomplete.

I was also disappointed that they did not finish the movie up to the last.

[Anthonio042]

I wholeheartedly agree with what you're saying. Most movies based on books have fallen short of our expectations, and I don't think this is an outlier. However, both of which have a unique intensity and brilliance to offer.

[Owuamanam Eberechukwu]

Hi! I noticed that when books are made into movies, the movie producers might change the story to make the movie more interesting. While small changes might be fine, what are your thoughts on drastic changes? Would it be better to stick with the book's story, which is what the author imagined, or to change it to attract a bigger audience? What are some examples of good and bad movie adaptations, and what are some examples of some aspects that were lost when a book was made into a movie?

Most books if adapted into a movie exactly the way the are written will be less interesting. Books are powerful because of the use of literary appreciation and figures of speech. While movies is great if the twist, suspense, theme, and actors courage and professionalism is of best output. I feel books adapted into movies should be adjusted.

[Ebets]

I think it would be better to stick to the author's story with little changes. I feel like drastic changes to get a bigger audience ruins the experience and can sometimes ruin the book for me to. I have heard from more people who read a lot rave when a movie follows the book almost to the whole point. Then I hear a lot of bad review from people when there are drastic changes.

[human reader]

One of the best examples of a logical change from book to movie is in The Wizard of Oz. In the book, the initial meeting with The Wizard is individual to each character. Because movies try to reel in budgets and keep things short and simple, reducing that to a group meeting makes a lot of sense. I do like the original version a lot though. It has The Wizard become, or rather pretend to be, a great Head (Dorothy), lovely Lady (Scarecrow), terrible Beast (Tin Woodman) and Ball of Fire (Lion). The Wizard appears cleverer in that he tailors his appearance to what he thinks will be effective for that individual.

The Voyage of the Dawn Treader book has Lucy casting a spell to find out what her friends think of her. The movie changes it to a spell that creates snow indoors. While this is a pretty scene, I feel it robs Lucy of some depth. The book strongly suggests Lucy used magic in a wrong manner by spying on her friends. Lucy is relatable because she makes a mistake, particularly when it's out of insecurity. Movies sometimes choose spectacle over character moments.

[Hannah Hampton]

What a great question! I usually prefer the movie to stick as closely to the book as possible while preserving the integrity of the story. Sometimes a plot will translate better if certain elements are changed, such as giving characters more dialogue to compensate for an internal monologue in the book. In general, I think following the story as closely as possible is a good move!

[Sarah Mason]

I hate when they add things from a book and put it in the movie. One of my favorite books of all time is [i]The Shining[/i] by Stephen King. I love the book but I can not stand the movie. They added the twin girls who weren't in the book and the whole "Here's Johnny" part which neither of them were in the movie. I hate that they add stuff things like that, that are not in the book.

[Donald Donaldson]

Hi! I noticed that when books are made into movies, the movie producers might change the story to make the movie more interesting. While small changes might be fine, what are your thoughts on drastic changes? Would it be better to stick with the book's story, which is what the author imagined, or to change it to attract a bigger audience? What are some examples of good and bad movie adaptations, and what are some examples of some aspects that were lost when a book was made into a movie?

a book will always, ALWAYS, be superior to its movie adaptation. Quote me anywhere. I do not know why producers deviate from the original story when making movies. it puzzles me.

[Marquesa]

well, sometimes they say “based on the book…” which gives them the freedom to play a little with the story or characters in order to make the movie more interesting for the audience. I have no problem with that.