MovieChat Forums > Dark Places (2015) Discussion > Changes from the book (spoilers)

Changes from the book (spoilers)

posted 9 years ago by Drew_Darko
19 replies | jump to latest

First of all, I am so not the kind of person who thinks all movie adaptations are inferior compared to their literary counterparts. There are a lot of movies that I think are just as good, and sometimes better, than the books they were based on.

With that being said, there were two character changes that I didn't like in Dark Places, and I'm curious how other book readers felt about them.

1. Lyle. I thought the movie completely ruined his character. In the book, he is still awkward and a little weird, but I always thought there was still something oddly charming about him. But Nicholas Hoult's performance was just so, for lack of a better word, blah. He was dull and lifeless and I never in a million years would have expected Charlize Theron to end up with him...oh, wait, that never happened in the movie. In the book, Lyle and Libby slowly become confidantes and, at the very end, form a romantic relationship, but there was no such closure between them in the movie. And besides that, I never really cared about their relationship (or lack thereof) in the movie. There was no chemistry, no bonding. What I loved so much about their relationship in the book was that Libby was finally letting someone into her life after all these years, and I just did not see that in the movie.

2. Ben. I found it kind of disturbing how sympathetic they tried to make Ben in the movie. I know he didn't actually kill anyone himself, but he could have tried much, much harder to stop Diondra from killing his sister. And then he spends over two decades protecting a murderer. That sappy scene between him and Libby at the end of the movie was just too much for me, especially when he asked if his daughter was "bad" like her mother. Ummm...last time I checked, her dad was pretty effed up too. I would have maybe appreciated the scene more if I felt like Ben was truly sorry for his actions, but I wasn't buying it.

[–] jyanks 9 years ago

They also killed Diane in the movie. She is estranged from Libby in the book. And details about why they are estranged (dog killing etc)

The comments I express here are based on my opinion only.

[–] DutchieVanHell 9 years ago

Indeed on the Ben thing. In the book he was there the whole time and could have stopped Diondra, but he didn't, he just let her.

[–] speedy1383 9 years ago

Been trying to find my book. But as I remember it Ben was there when Diondra killed his sister. That was a huge issue with me with the book. I don't feel Ben should have been let out to be quite honest. He was an accomplice. I felt no sympathy for him.

[–] Drew_Darko 9 years ago

Indeed on the Ben thing. In the book he was there the whole time and could have stopped Diondra, but he didn't, he just let her.

That was a huge issue with me with the book. I don't feel Ben should have been let out to be quite honest. He was an accomplice. I felt no sympathy for him.

Exactly! I didn't feel sympathy for him either. He was just as guilty, although it's his word against a dead girl, so I understand why they let him out.

[–] jonnypenn84 9 years ago

Even if you consider him an accomplice... he already served about 30 years. You get less than that for actually killing a person (Especially a teenager killing someone )

[–] Drew_Darko 9 years ago

That is a good point. I hadn't thought of it that way.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Jferg01 9 years ago

He served 28 years. How long to you think an accomplice after the fact should have to serve?

[–] daredevil1-1 9 years ago

Where did you get in the book that Lyle and Libby start a relationship? I got the *hinting* toward that, but that was only a single line that they were watching tv together weeks later implying they hang out now. I got more the impression they were just good friends at the end, Lyle was too much younger and a total geekwad to Libby, but still a friend.

[–] Drew_Darko 9 years ago

I guess I should have said that they were on the verge of starting a relationship. At least that's how I saw it. But your interpretation works as well. It could go either way.

I was kind of curious so I dug out my copy of the book and reread their last scene together. The reasons why I think something romantic is happening between them: When they're watching TV, Libby says she misses Lyle when he's not around. And she was wearing his sweater. And their very last exchange:

"Lyle Wirth, you are goddam brilliant," I said, and then I hugged him.

"Well, he said, and then laughed. Wow. Huh, brilliant. Libby Sticky Fingers thinks I'm brilliant."

"Absolutely."

[–] kyleluna 9 years ago

I did notice also a lot of changes from the book right after I watched this movie. To be honest, I noticed major changes in the film adaptation of Dark Places. Right after I read the book and then I watch the film the following day, there were several changes which you guys were right about. The first one is the absence of several characters from the book like Barb Eichel who was the author who Libby visited after she meets Lyle and the Kill Club group, the other characters that are missing also from the novel like that young stripper who Krissi Cates was helping. The two siblings that's the Muehler brothers if I got the name right, who are friends with Ben along with the police officer who talked to Patty and Diane about Ben. Runner's second ex girlfriend was also missing in the book. Several scenes were also changed, like in the climax when Libby finds finds out that Diondra was the one who killed Michelle and Libby finds a cross necklace that her mother wore. Because in the book Libby finds out that Diondra was the one who killed Michelle when she finds out that Diondra knows about Michelle's crush that's Todd Delhunt, during when Libby was having supper with Crystal and Diondra, since in the novel Diondra took Michelle's diary while in the movie it was her mom's necklace. Also, the character of Aunt Diane was dead in the movie while in the novel she's alive. The police officer telling Patty and Diane that he found several animal intestines I think that he found in Ben's locker which also frightened Patty about her son was cut from the book. The other thing that was different in the film, is the appearance of Libby Day. Because in the novel she's short and she changed her hair color from blond to red. Here, Libby is very tall and she never dyed her hair red. In my honest opinion, Charlize Theron is good for the role she has the personality of Libby but does not match the physical appearance of Libby. I think Rosamund Pike or Amy Adams could have been more suitable for the role. I also like Corey Stoll in the role of Ben Day, but he doesn't look as much as Ben in the novel or his personality is nowhere as close to the novel. I always thought that Paul Rudd could have been more suitable for the role of Ben Day.

[–] martsu 9 years ago

You're taking this just a little too serious! Movies that are based on books aren't direct copies of the story. They aren't supposed to be so. Some details always get left out. You do realize that half of these things you mentioned aren't that relevant, right?

[–] kyleluna 9 years ago

I actually think that several scenes from the book could have been in the movie since I noticed the movie was missing a bunch of plot points that were a bit important and the characters we're not as dark as in the novel at least some of them. Sometimes these details are relevant to answer the plot points of the novel and the movie.

[–] Drew_Darko 9 years ago

I agree with you that a lot of important details were left out...but I also have to agree with martsu. I don't see how they could have included everything you mentioned into a 2-hour movie.

[–] Waldimore 9 years ago

I think the consensus is that the film did not work and the people commenting who have read the book are referring to the changes as a way of understanding why these changes were made since it didn't make the movie any better.

It's hard to adapt a novel which is in prose form to a screenplay, dramatic form. Changes have to come about due to the rules of drama. But it's the adapter's job to pull out the essential parts of the story or at the very least use the novel as a guide to tell a compelling dramatic story. Sometimes, adaptations make radical changes that make for a good, if not better film version.

I don't mind as long as the finished film is good.

In this case, this adaptation appears not to have done that plus the casting choices appear to have been part of the problem.

I haven't read the book, but I could feel that Charlize Theron was miscast and the part should have been played by a more physically vulnerable-looking actress. That was completely clear to me, someone who did not know that the novel's character was 4'10.

Also, Ben was a character who needed to be more submissive and easily dominated and we need to see him lacking the ability to take control of a situation. Diondra needed to be more physically imposing to get across Ben's submissiveness.

Flashbacks can be tough to pull off in any movie. And there were so many angles to this movie's flashbacks. The murder was the focus, but when they put in the part about Ben molesting young girls, it kind of diminished the murder. And then to turn out that all these girls lied, complicated the story more.

So this movie was lost in translation.

I think that's all people are pointing out and it's fair. No one is saying this about all movie adaptations. Just this one.

[–] Miss_Sui_Generis 9 years ago

You've hit the nail on the head.

Send lawyers,guns and money/The *beep* has hit the fan

[–] daveyh (641) a year ago

if i've worked this out right, the above comment was written in 2015 - I think Gone Girl was already out, or at least it was known that Rosmund Pike would be in that. But it's 3 or 4 years before Amy Adams was cast as the lead in the TV adaption of Gillian Flynn's other novel! That's quite spooky

[–] ccdel 8 years ago

Libby and Lyle don't necessarily have a romantic relationship in the book. It's just written that they spend time together watching TV. I took it as a friendship - a big step for Libby.

And, in the book, Ben asks if Crystal is bad like them - meaning himself, his mom, Libby.

[–] Boromir (10131) 4 years ago

Ben character in the book is much more ambivalent and darker than in the movie. In the movie, as you said, they made him to sympathetic. For example, he was apathetic and angry toward Michelle and Debby - especially Michelle. He didn't defend Michelle, when his girlfriend kill her, he just freeze, in the movie they are in the same room and he seen his sister died in front his eyes and he didn't do nothing. In the book he showed no remorse for their deaths. Also Ben expressed hostility and hatred towards all female family members, and even his affection for Libby was only partial. Moreover, I disappointed to see how they destroyed one of the most chilling and heartbreaking parts of the book, I'm talking about the scene where Ben dyed his hair, it's much more intense in the book and makes you think he's no innocent. In contrast, in the film the viewer can understood from the beginning that he's not related to the murders.