Films Not As Good As The Books ? (1 Viewer)

[bringbackrattles]

It was the way he was so calm about it all though, not flying in to fits of rage and hammering people. Could just walk up and shoot somebody in the head and then carry on with his day.

Some of the hardest people I've known were very quiet and never gobbed off. But mess with them and they were brutal. What's that saying "It's the quiet ones you have to watch out for."

 

---

[fernandopartridge]

Filth (Irvine Welsh)

 

[skybluedan]

James and the giant peach

 

[Covstu]

Tolkein's works are another example of this - his world was so expansive that you would never be able to put it all into a film unless you were looking at 20+ hours of film, but by making the films they allowed people to access the story that many never would otherwise.

I think they did a pretty good job in the main on both LOTR and The Hobbit trilogies.

Yep both sets of films were superb, the extensions worked aswell

 

[Captain Dart]

Tolkein's works are another example of this - his world was so expansive that you would never be able to put it all into a film unless you were looking at 20+ hours of film, but by making the films they allowed people to access the story that many never would otherwise.

I think they did a pretty good job in the main on both LOTR and The Hobbit trilogies.

The Hobbit films are virtually unmatchable bore fests. The book is more accessible, not too long.

 

[Ian1779]

The Hobbit films are virtually unmatchable bore fests. The book is more accessible, not too long.

Agree that the Hobbit is relatively accessible... but it's a huge jump to LOTR