El Sitherino Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by Darth Groovy Some of you may remember how excited I was about a WotW remake about a year ago, with concept art from Pendragon. The more I hear about this remake, the more I weep. Having seen the most dissapointing teaser trailer of my entire life.....AND the news that Tom Cruise will be in this, it's almost like an Austin Powers joke made serious, and it is not funny at all. the pendragon one and this are different movies. :x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by InsaneSith the pendragon one and this are different movies. :x what the hell is this pendragon business, the only pendragon I know was King Arthurs father mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapNColostomy Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 LMFAO at Astro and his ball pic. Great stuff. I love this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by CapNColostomy LMFAO at Astro and his ball pic. Great stuff. I love this forum. coolage. my joke has the presidential seal of approval I have serious concerns for that movie, perhaps the actual movie poster will be just a pair of huge testicles hovering above Washington DC ..... *sigh.....how art imitates life* mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Groovy Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by Astrotoy7 what the hell is this pendragon business, the only pendragon I know was King Arthurs father mtfbwya http://www.pendragonpictures.com/WOTWKEY.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by Darth Groovy http://www.pendragonpictures.com/WOTWKEY.html hmmm...interesting thanks for the linky mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leper Messiah Posted December 2, 2004 Author Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by STTCT I'm sorry - but did you not see what he did to Jurassic Park - that was him right? Classic example of taking a great book, stealing the concept (dinosaur park), and then doing whatever the hell he wants to it. Oh well... well Spielberg didnt take Jurassic Park out of its time and place setting, didnt invent new characters and for the most part kept the story largely intact In War Of The Worlds, Speilberg will not be doing those things, that much is certain. As ive said, he's basically using War Of The Worlds as a brand name. By InsaneSith Just because speilburg is directing it doesn't mean he makes all the decisions. The Pendragon version being faithful to the book is all down to Timothy Hines, the director of that version. I recall J.K.Rowling being very careful not to allow Speilberg to direct Harry Potter because she feared he would twist it into something unrecognizable as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by Leper Messiah ... I recall J.K.Rowling being very careful not to allow Speilberg to direct Harry Potter because she feared he would twist it into something unrecognizable as well. well, since WOTW is spielberg now, Im sure he'll manage to squeeze in a few Nazis bein bad into it, that, a mechanical shark and an annoying mound of turd that whose race has supposedly mastered space travel..... mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leper Messiah Posted December 2, 2004 Author Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by Astrotoy7 well, since WOTW is spielberg now, Im sure he'll manage to squeeze in a few Nazis bein bad into it, that, a mechanical shark and an annoying mound of turd that whose race has supposedly mastered space travel..... mtfbwya lol, its all possible with *drum roll* Spielberg the Book Burner!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alegis Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 I was INCREDIBLY dissapointed how one of my favourite books, The Bourne Identity (/supremacy/ultimatum), was raped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LightNinja Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by Alegis I was INCREDIBLY dissapointed how one of my favourite books, The Bourne Identity (/supremacy/ultimatum), was raped. at least they didint rape LOTR(well a bit) or Harry Potter =P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Am I the only one who's not shocked/dissapointed? This is a MOVIE, not the actual book itself. Things are bound to be different. Some things work better in movies than they do in books and vice versa. For example, the LOTR books feature far more character development than the movies for various reasons. However the LOTR movies are more exciting and stuff. Besides stuff is usually altered from it's source material to make for a better movie. For instance, in Braveheart, historical accuracy is at an all-time low but that makes a better story even if it is innacurate. Something doesn't have to be a perfect adaptation of it's source material to be a good story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_hill987 Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by LightNinja at least they didint rape Harry Potter =P WTF? the first film was nothing like the book! and I don't remember Harry hanging out of the flying car in the second book. edit: just so I don't go off topic, Spielberg hasn't made a good film since Jaws, I doubt this will be any different from his last few attempts, And don't you dare say A.I. was a good film! It waisted 3 hours of my life and I will never get them back! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Fisher Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 It seems that the movies cannot rape any book they try and make a movie after. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 I think the lesson we can all learn from this thread is that almost NOBODY remains true to a book when it is being adapted to a movie. Why? It's difficult to do, you're changing mediums. what works well in books doesn't translate to movie and vice versa. In the end, it would probably be best if books were never made into movies, as they are almost ALWAYS a let down. In fact, LotR and Jurassic Park are really the only set of movies from books where I wasn't let down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_hill987 Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by ET Warrior Jurassic Park ...........I wasn't let down. Really? the first was Ok, but i thought the others a bit daft, did the raptors come back for the eggs in the book? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Oh god no, i'm not talking about the other two jurassic park movies. Those movies were abysmal at best. The first Jurassic Park movie was excellent thought I, even though it wasn't completely true to the book, the changes they made I felt were necessary for the change in medium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leper Messiah Posted December 2, 2004 Author Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by ET Warrior I think the lesson we can all learn from this thread is that almost NOBODY remains true to a book when it is being adapted to a movie. Why? It's difficult to do, you're changing mediums. what works well in books doesn't translate to movie and vice versa. In the end, it would probably be best if books were never made into movies, as they are almost ALWAYS a let down. In fact, LotR and Jurassic Park are really the only set of movies from books where I wasn't let down. well, maybe but then again just because its difficult to adapt doesnt mean you write a new story and put the same name on it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 It doesn't sound to me like they're writing a new story. Sounds to me like they're adapting the story to fit into a 2 hour movie. But then again, I haven't followed the movie project very closely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shok_Tinoktin Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 The fact that there is a Pendragon version, and especially that it is sticking closely to the book, gives Speilberg a lot of creative licence. How great would it be to have several near-identical versions of the same movie? And about taking it out of its time and place setting, that is common to an adaptation. Thats part of what makes it a unique movie. That you can take some story, and give it a new twist. If you want the story to be as true to the book as possible, my advise is read the book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leper Messiah Posted December 2, 2004 Author Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by Shok_Tinoktin The fact that there is a Pendragon version, and especially that it is sticking closely to the book, gives Speilberg a lot of creative licence. How great would it be to have several near-identical versions of the same movie? And about taking it out of its time and place setting, that is common to an adaptation. Thats part of what makes it a unique movie. That you can take some story, and give it a new twist. If you want the story to be as true to the book as possible, my advise is read the book. yes, but inventing characters? removing events and adding new ones, and WHY THAT STUPID DISFUNCTIONAL FAMILY STORYLINE?! WHY????!!!!! updating it, id prefer it if they didnt but that alone isnt fatal, its the subsequent throwing everything else out of the boat and bringing back, from what has been seen of the filming, one scene from the book. (however it is the awesome "Thunder Child Sequence" but i can see Speilberg doing something stupid with that even like having the Thunder Child survive the fight or something) bottom line, i really hate this movie because i know ill pay to go and see it, ill hate it (and probably say so more than once) from start to finish and fume for days afterwards about it, i dont know why i cant stop myself from doin it either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shok_Tinoktin Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 If changes to the setting are all that is exceptable, then you would have several movies that are near-exactly the same. Plus a book that is also almost the same. Whats the point? You have to expect that an adaptation is going to be significantly different than the original, especially when multiple adaptations are made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leper Messiah Posted December 2, 2004 Author Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by Shok_Tinoktin If changes to the setting are all that is exceptable, then you would have several movies that are near-exactly the same. Plus a book that is also almost the same. Whats the point? You have to expect that an adaptation is going to be significantly different than the original, especially when multiple adaptations are made. my argument is that its too different to be a War Of The Worlds adaptation, its too far removed from the actual story, it has gone far too far. and the fact that "Generic Action Movie Plot #14: Guy has difficulty with family" has been added proves to me that theyve no interest in a good adaptation of the story anyway, they just want one of their nice, big money lots of explosions spectacle, which on any other day would be ok, but theres the large factor that theyre holding this up to be WAR OF THE WORLDS one of the greatest and most pioneering science fiction stories of all time and theyre going to slaughter it for the sake of cash they could easily get elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_hill987 Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by Leper Messiah WAR OF THE WORLDS one of the greatest and most pioneering science fiction stories of all time You could say the same about I Robot, again a brilliant Sci Fi book. I havn't seen the fillm but I'm betting the plot is about as far removed from the book as the War of the worlds film will be, if not more so, as I Robot was a colection of short stories rather than one. it dosn't make I Robot a bad film Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leper Messiah Posted December 2, 2004 Author Share Posted December 2, 2004 Originally posted by jon_hill987 You could say the same about I Robot, again a brilliant Sci Fi book. I havn't seen the fillm but I'm betting the plot is about as far removed from the book as the War of the worlds film will be, if not more so, as I Robot was a colection of short stories rather than one. it dosn't make I Robot a bad film War Of The Worlds might be just about be ok as just a film (however my feeling is that it will be a plotless wonder) but as an actual War Of The Worlds adaptation it will suck, and it will suck mightily. in fact this films prospects have "Waterworld" written all over it IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.