156
What's the worst change made in a movie adaptation of a book? (lemmy.ca)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/asklemmy@lemmy.world
300 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] 32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (17 children)
[removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [–] 36 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    to 4yo me, JP was a horror film. I mean, the kitchen sequence alone. And the run underground in the dark in search of the fuses, only to find a severed arm.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Funny thing though, Jurassic Park is STILL wildly successful, and if it had followed the book, most people would have never heard of it today.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    I don’t see why it wouldn’t have been as successful

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    From what I heard the book had a lot more deep science and chaos theory, but I never read it. If true, nobody's taking their kids to that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I read it 3 times. When I was like 12. Chaos theory and science were certainly aspects; aspects of an exciting, edge of your seat, smart, well-plotted thriller, with engaging and relatable characters. It wasn’t a kids book, and doesn’t need to be a kids movie. This may shock you, but movies don’t have to be for kids in order to be successful.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    This may shock you, but movies don’t have to be for kids in order to be successful.

    I'm not shocked, because I never claimed this point at all, but I appreciate your attempt at insulting me for no reason.

    The formula that is Jurassic Park is complicated and has many variables. I'm sure the movie you would have preferred to get would have been great, but it wouldn't be the universally recognized franchise it is today.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Honestly? Gotta disagree. It's been a long time since I've read the book but I remember being disappointed by it after seeing the movie. Maybe I'll give it a reread and see if my opinion's changed. ETA: fuck all the movie sequels though, no one needed that shit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    The worst part of all these stupid spin off movies (besides how atrocious I’m assuming they are) is that they significantly reduce the likelihood we will ever get a movie that is faithful to the book.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I think since the Jurassic World series started, all of the reboots have mostly been "remember this" from the first movie, and none could really be anything more than that. Every one has to include a scene that's a homage to the original. Honestly feels like the franchise needs to have a genre switch up to force it to be something original.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •