Young Writers Society

Darren Shan definitely, I loved the books, but then the film, was just awful, not just as a a film, but as a representation of the first three books, introducing characters too early, and some characters were just plain portrayed wrong!

My friends all agreed with me on this, very disappointed!

magnusbanefan13 wrote:The Series of Unfortunate Events. They killed it when they made the movie.

Yeah, definitely. I think they got the visual style down right, though.

But I think it's silly how some people get so worked up over minor omissions...I remember some people online were having fits because Nicole Kidman was cast in The Golden Compass even though she had BLONDE hair instead of black hair like in the book! Scandalous!

On another note, The Golden Compass movie was crap. It totally slaughtered the ending, which is sad, because if it wasn't for that it would have been a decent adaptation...the worst part is the ending was shot but they decided to cut it off at the last minute because audiences would be more likely to return if the movie had a "happy" cliffhanger ending.

Yeah. Right.

The obvious one: Harry Potter. All of them. There was no way books those thick were going to make good movies. I suppose I like the movies, but the differences between the books and the movies were so big, it's like they're telling two different stories.

Two movies I haven't actually seen but I can tell they're terrible: Inkheart (book by Cornelia Funke) and Eragon (book by Christopher Paolini). Even just watching the trailers almost ruined the books for me.

The Golden Compass (based on Northern Lights by Philip Pullman) was alright, but because of the ending and the depth of the writing and content, it was never going to make a decent movie.

Also, they're making Artemis Fowl into a movie, which I shall avoid like the plague. You'd think writers and directors would know when their books will make crap movies, but no. I will also avoid the CHERUB movie like smallpox.

Ella Enchanted I actually liked better than the book! I don't really admire Gail Carson Levine much as a writer, and the movie was cute and funny and something I can watch with my kid sister while eating popcorn with too much butter. Loved it.

I think that's about it. Oh, but I'm sure Tomorrow When The War began will be brilliant! I really think authors and Hollywood bigwigs need to learn what books will make great movies and which ones will Just. Plain. Suck. Is it really that hard?

I Am Legend - Richard Matheson.

The movie was a fun vampire blockbuster but I think the novel is much better. I wouldn't actually describe it as a story about vampires though as it focuses more on loneliness and the loss of hope. There's a very touching couple of chapters about a dog that are particularly heartbreaking and extremely well written.

emoinpink wrote:Also, they're making Artemis Fowl into a movie, which I shall avoid like the plague. You'd think writers and directors would know when their books will make crap movies, but no. I will also avoid the CHERUB movie like smallpox.

So true, everything else you said was true to, but these are going to be really bad. No actor could even begin to try to be Artemis Fowl.

A. S.

The Series of Unfortunate Events. They killed it when they made the movie.

I completly agree. Also all the Narnia movies, and the Happy Potter movies, the directors killed them, too. They are probably going to slaughter the Maximum Ride series... Apparenly they wanna use the girl who played Bella and the dude who played Edward as Max and Fang. If they do I'm going to march my self on over to James Patterson (and the screenplay peeps) and give them a serious talking- to. Write on...

twiggers wrote:They are probably going to slaughter the Maximum Ride series... Apparenly they wanna use the girl who played Bella and the dude who played Edward as Max and Fang. If they do I'm going to march my self on over to James Patterson (and the screenplay peeps) and give them a serious talking- to. Write on...

That is horrible!

Inkheart.

All the Harry Potter movies after the fourth.

Eragon was a rubbish book, but the movie was worse.

Percy Jackson, they tried to modernize and sexualize everything.

Narnia movies, and yes, a Series of Unfortunate Events.

The Golden Compass was terrible.

They're going to make a Tales of the Otori movie, I don't know whether to laugh and cry.

And that Artemis Fowl movie, can you believe Eoin Colfer said they were gonna compress the first two books together? Words fail me...

TIGERSPRITE

I'm going to avoid the maximum ride movies like the plauge.

Calligraphy wrote:

twiggers wrote:They are probably going to slaughter the Maximum Ride series... Apparenly they wanna use the girl who played Bella and the dude who played Edward as Max and Fang. If they do I'm going to march my self on over to James Patterson (and the screenplay peeps) and give them a serious talking- to. Write on...

That is horrible!

Yes it is! They should use younger teens, not older teens!


Inkheart

I know! Like me... brown eyes, blondeish brown hair, maxish attitude... I'd be perfect for the part of max! Just get a cute guy to be Fang, please, not some random weenie.

Lonesome Dove. This is the best book ever. The movie was pretty impressive how it followed the story exactly. The reason why I loved the book more was because it took longer to read, whereas the movie version had only about four hours of enjoyment. Also, the book is where I first met the characters and the little town of Lonesome Dove; where they really stole my heart.

There is more than one lonesome dove. I mean there is the rest of the series in the movie version. I have never read the book...

A. S.

Harry Potter all round!!!
The movies just can't hope to justify the books. But Rupert Grint was a good find - don't we all love European boys with outrageous facial expressions?
I cannot stress how much I love those books. I am way before the number one fan. They are my LIFE.
Yes, it's that sad.
Eragon - duh. The movie was awful.
Narnia. I actually liked the ancient version better than the newer one, even though the special effects were rubbish. The acting was better. And, as with Harry Potter, no movie could ever live up to those books.
Inkheart. This movie was bad. Worse. Beyond worse. Worse than beyond worse. None of the actors suited the parts, it was terribly acted, and - WHAT ON EARTH DID THEY DO TO DUSTFINGER????
I'm not sure about The Lord of the Rings. I adore both the books and the movies - alongside HP, they are my identity - and I really can't decide which is better. It infuriates me how the movies sidetrack sometimes from the original plot, but all the same - they make me cry. Not ashamed to admit it.
If they make a Deltora Quest movie, I shall avoid it with every ounce of determination I posses.
That's basically it. I'll probably think of some others later on, but there it is.

Inkheart. This movie was bad. Worse. Beyond worse. Worse than beyond worse. None of the actors suited the parts, it was terribly acted, and - WHAT ON EARTH DID THEY DO TO DUSTFINGER????

I completly agree. Honestly, Brendan Frasier (i cant spell his name so whatevr) really sucked in that movie.
Also, The golden compass, the book was gold, the movie was vomit that a dog pooped on, ate barfed up, some director saw it, and mushed it up into a movie. How pleasant.