oscar?

I am a big fan of John Fowles and have read The Collector many times. I disagree with your criticism of the film, which I found an excellent cinematic version. If you disliked this, you must really have despised The Magus, for which Fowles himself wrote the screenplay and practically left Alison out altogether, which made the film (1968) a scant shadow of the novel, one of my all-time favorites.

I'm unsure which name changes you speak of: the main characters are Ferdinand and Miranda (as in The Tempest) in both versions.

Miranda's sections in the novel are journal entries, which do not translate well to film. Her concerns and fears are well presented in her conversations with her abductor.

As the ending of film and novel showed, Frederick had no real concern for Miranda; he claims all along that he "loves" her, but in reality he is infatuated only with his adolescent fantasy of control and domination, common enough in young boys but quite dangerous when given free reign by an enormous amount of money and time. Stamp's excellent portrayal of the character never lets us forget how twisted he is.

I have no sense of the timeline of the plot being disrupted in any way. The main focus once Miranda is abducted is her maturing in the face of great danger, and her attempts, first planned and then desperate, to escape. Quite smooth and convincing, to my eye, in the film.

As for the bathtub scene, I thought it was incredibly effective. I can't say I remember it precisely in the book, but in the movie it represents well how hopeless her situation is, even though we never want to believe it. The photography scenes would be sensational, and Samantha Eggar is a gorgeous woman (check out Return from the Ashes if you can), but it doesn't surprise me that these were left out in 1965, and, as I have said, Ferdinand's "dirty mind" was pretty much always in evidence.

Sorry you were dissatisfied, but I have always found this to be a wonderful and powerful film, ever since I first saw it in the theater when I was sixteen. Give it another try sometime; this is actually my favorite Fowles film adaptation, though I do like The French Lieutenant's Woman very much, too.

Your subject line "oscar?" implies that this movie didn't deserve its nominations. If the movie were made TODAY, and it was exactly as it is, you would have a point. But you are clearly looking at the movie through 21st century eyes. Go back in time to 1965 - this movie was just as controversial and ground-breaking as Blue Velvet 20 years later, and anything by Tarantino since the mid-90s.

I'm not sufficiently interested in your comparison of the book and the movie to comment, but it's the oldest and most tired criticism of any movie ever adapted from a book, "Oh the book was MUCH better." So what? Go read the book again then.

Well I've never read the book so I can't say if it's a good or a bad adaptation, but the film alone is a masterpiece even if it's not faithful to its source.

Don't pay attention to rating (esp. on IMDB/troll site) and Oscars (who nominates crapfests like Chariots of Fire and Driving Miss Daisy). Samantha Eggar was better than Julie Christie by a football stadium. Eh whatever at least Eggar won the Cannes and a Golden Globe.