This is a good topic.
IMO To Kill A Mockingbird is one of the best adaptations ever made. No doubt partly because Lee Harper was involved, as a consultant, I believe.
Never read Dr Zhivago, but the film was excellent.
I've seen a few adaptations of both Wuthering Heights and Jane Eyre that were excellent, and a few that were meh.
While I've seen Breakfast at Tiffany's several times and have read most of Capote's work, I've never read it, so I can't make any comparison. All I know is in his novella, Holly was a call girl, and in the film it was cleaned up so she wasn't. All the same, I thought it was a wonderful film.
Prince of Tides was an extraordinary novel, so beautifully and powerfully written. Some people I knew were very disappointed in the film, probably mostly due to Barbra Streisand's performance. She can never quite get past wanting to be a diva. While it didn't capture the nuances of the novel (which few films can), and I too was slightly annoyed by her performance, on the whole I thought the film was good. Nick Nolte was excellent in it.
This is a rare case, but the film version of The Bridges of Madison County *far* surpassed the rather insipid novella it was based on. Clint Eastwood, and secondarily Merle Streep, really did turn a sow's ear into a silk purse. I'd have never read the novella had it not been for the film. Quite a disappointment, and it gave me appreciation for Eastwood for doing what he did with the material.
Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil was the reverse. From my observation, the people who really liked it hadn't read the book. The film wasn't bad, but in this instance Eastwood took an extraordinary book, and made it into a just okay film, despite the great cast. I was very disappointed in the film. But, to be fair, it wasn't all that bad, it just paled considerably when compared to the book.
reply
share
Catbookss (13664)
7 years ago
Ran out of characters.
My favourite adaptation has to be the 2002 mini series of The Forsyte Saga. The characters were so multi-dimensional and nuanced, I was blown away by it and still am. I've seen it probably 10 times by now and each time there's something new to discover, and I form a different opinion of the characters.
Along the same line is The Heiress, based on James' Washington Square. Again great nuanced performances and I end up changing my opinion of the characters, to a degree, each time I see it.
reply
share
godewey (16472)
7 years ago
Unfortunately I don't read as much as I used to.
You are correct on Wuthering Heights. There have been some that were most definitely meh.
I never read Washington Square but The Heiress was a really good movie. Just watched in fact.
I also saw the movie Washington Square from 1997 which was not good at all.
I also thought of Pride and Prejudice and Jayne Eyre were both good films. Of course there were good ones
and not so good ones.
reply
share
Catbookss (13664)
7 years ago
I don't read nearly as much as I used to do either.
I've seen at least two good adaptations of Wuthering Heights, but I don't think anyone has yet made one that fully conveys just how dark and violent parts of it is. It must have been a very shocking read when it was first published!
The Heiress is great, so was the novel. I actually liked the 1997 Washington Square, because I thought different dimensions of the main characters were brought to it, and that the acting was excellent.
Which Pride and Prejudice and Jane Eyre versions did you think were the best ones?
reply
share
godewey (16472)
7 years ago
My favorite Jane Eyre version is the one with Orson Wells and Joan Fontaine.
The best might one I saw a while ago. Maybe 10-15 years ago. It was a mini series.
I thought it very well done. There was also one a few years ago that I thought was well done.
My favorite Pride movie is the 1940's adaptation with Greer Garson. It wasn't exact to the book but I thought
it was a good movie. For the record I kind of have a thing for Greer Garson. I think she is a tremendous actress.
I thought the movie with Keira Knightley was very well acted. Something about it bothered me. I can't remember
what it was.
reply
share
LeiaOfLothlorien (1980)
7 years ago
I was going to respond to you earlier, but it slipped my mind, oops.
Anyway, I think the Pride and Predjudice adaptations I saw were reasonably good. The BBC mini series went into more detail, since it was longer, and therefore I believe it stayed closer to the book and even elaborated on the source material a bit. The later movie with the actress that played Elizabeth Swann in PotC and the actor that played President Snow in the Hunger Games wasn't bad, but if I remember correctly, it glossed over some parts of the books and changed others; that and the more well-known actors/actresses were a bit distracting. Both adaptations had their pros and cons.
reply
share
godewey (16472)
7 years ago
You should have responded earlier. I should have been your number one priority. :P
I never saw that version. I don't know if I have seen what I consider to be that "one" adaptation
that epitomize the novel. Other than maybe Pride and Prejudice and Zombies. :)
Was It you I talked to about this a while ago ? Somebody said this would make a great series.
Kind of like Fargo. Just one season and done. 10 or 12 episodes. If it was done correctly I thought
that was a great Idea. With that many episodes it wouldn't have an excuse to leave anything out.
reply
share
LeiaOfLothlorien (1980)
7 years ago
Was there a third (fourth if you count the one with zombies..) version that I didn't know of? I haven't seen the one with zombies and don't plan to, lol.
The BBC series had only 5-6 episodes and it seemed to cover most of the material if I remember correctly. I think it was aired in the 1990s, but I found it on Blu-Ray.
I saw both a few months ago, soon after I read the book, so they're kinda jumbled in my mind tbh.
EDIT: Here's the mini-series I saw: https://moviechat.org/tt0112130/Pride-and-Prejudice
I can't find the movie on here, but it was the 2005 version.
reply
share
godewey (16472)
7 years ago
You got me thinking so I looked it up. The first movie version was in 1938.
It looks like there have been several mini series. It looks like one almost every decade since the 50's.
They all seem to get fairly good ratings. It does look like one you talked about from the 90's is rated
the highest. It has Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle.
How could you not want to watch Darcy and Elizabeth fighting zombies.
reply
share
LeiaOfLothlorien (1980)
7 years ago
Which version did you see?
I find zombies disgusting and overrated. I only put up with them in Game of Thrones because all of the other cool stuff in the show, lol.
reply
share
godewey (16472)
7 years ago
I saw the 40's film version and the Keira Knightley version. I am almost positive I saw
the 80's mini series. Although I can't be sure and don't remember much if I did.
That's why the one you mentioned from the 90's intrigues me.
"I find zombies disgusting and overrated"
That's why I love them. They have been around a while. Only recently have become popular.
I agree they are over saturated. Kind of like what happened with vampires.
reply
share