What's /lit/'s opinion on books being converted to film? Is this for plebs only, does it sometimes open a new window into the enjoyment of the work, or other?
(For those who say "hurr durr movies r 4 dumb ppl"- Keep in mind that the top 3 rated movies on IMDb are from BOOKS, Shawshank Redemption, Godfather 1 and 2. And the fourth is from a Comic book.)
Honestly, I think you have to be stupid to say that the Godfather 1&2, Shawshank Redemption and Nolan's The Dark Knight were bad interpretations of a literary work.
>Pic def related
Good books can't be converted to film
>>7667894
It's pretty much the only way the masses will read a book, is if a movie adaption is coming out and there's hype around it. It's also probably the only way to make a real living as a writer anymore.
>>7667894
>on /lit/
>disregarding op
Allrighty then
>>7667936
So, overall, it's harmful to the /lit/ community? I'm well aware that it turned Suzanne Collins from a recognized name into a billionare.
But my thought is: Imagine libraries. Imagine if your book is picked up by public libraries who buy copies. That alone would make you some money, right?
>>7667911
Apocalypse was more inspired than based upon Heart of Darkness.
>shawshank
Not a book son, but a short story 0/1
>Godfather I
Not a book but only half of a book 0/2
>Godfather II
Again, half of a book 0/3
Have you read any of those books you mentioned. You should have talked about how Jaws and Bladerunner are better movies than their respective books. Rita Hayworth isn't even the best short story or movie adapted from that collection of short stories. Stand by me was a better short story and a better movie.
Lets see how you did
low effort 0/3
>Honestly, I think you have to be stupid to say that the Godfather 1&2, Shawshank Redemption and Nolan's The Dark Knight were bad interpretations of a literary work.
invidious obvious troll 0/5
Bad taste 0/2
Total:0/10 see me after your anime's over
You need to head back to /tv/ or pick a book
>>7668093
Honestly, what do you get out of acting like a prick on the internet?
>>7668093
OP seconds this. I laughed far too hard at this to be mad, wondering why anyone so intelligent would waste their time writing this out.
>>7668190
But he is right in some ways.
>>7667889
Watching a movie is never an excuse for not reading an excellent book on which it is based. There aren't a lot of movies that do a good job capturing the essence of the original book (much more important in an adaptation than slavishly reproducing the plot); an example that does this successfully is No Country for Old Men, which was originally written as a screenplay and was directed by one of the only film-maker (teams) that have worked with many of the same themes McCarthy does (i.e. Fargo).
It's important to note that the IMDB ranking of a movie says next to nothing about its quality. Shawshank Redemption is an unremarkable, if good, movie, The Dark Knight barely proves superior to its awkward execution (see Rises for a movie which does not), and despite the excellence of the first two Godfather films they are overrated and Coppola's subsequent career is ample evidence that they succeed despite, not because, of his filmmakimg abilities.
The best film adaptations of books explore a different angle or challenge the assumptions of the book. See Starship Troopers, Apocalypse Now, The Shining, and Solyaris.
The only movie that comes to mind that adapts the plot and themes of the book and is just straight up superior is Fight Club.
>>7667889
annie is shit
