Joe's thread on subjects brought up a queation in my mind. I decided it would be better to start a new thread than it would be to hijack his.
What do you think of very good books being made into films and/or mini-series?
Is it a good thing, or not?
What do you see as successful/unsuccessful attempts.
You can go back as far as you wnat, but current examples are equally valid.
On Joe's thread, I mentioned Robert Ludlam.
Two of his books became successful mini-series, and one of those grew into a series of films.
My first Ludlam book was The Rhinemann Exchange. The book was a true page turner. the series had some good moments. Stephen Collins played the male lead well, but, to save on air time, they morphed several of the female characters into one, and hired the model, Lauren Hutton, to play the character - and Lauren Hutton looked good, but couldn't act.
Later they took The Bourne Identity, one of the last series I read. The style was getting stale, but it was made into a decent series, starring Richard Chamberlane as Jason Bourne.
Then, years later, It became a series of films starring Matt Damon. I watched the first one. I think I managed to see it through. I had no desire to see the sequels.
It's pretty easy to overdo a good thng.
On the other hand, I thought the film version of Cold Mountain did a superb job of capturing Charles Frazier's concept, and, it seemed to me that Cameron MacIntosh's musical version of Les miserable was breathtaking on stage, and in an equally, but different way, was superb onscreen.
We could go on and on about JK Rowling's Harry Potter - for or against.
When can a great book translate into great film? when has it not?
Annie
Home 
Featured Members 
Articles 
