adaptation

Book vs. Movie: I Am Number Four

/ Kristi / Leave a comment

I watched this movie years ago, before I read the book or even knew a book existed. I remember enjoying it overall. Now that I’ve read the book, I re-watched the movie, and didn’t particularly like it as much this time. Of course, that has a lot to do with the deviations the movie makes from the book, some of which I just don’t even understand the reason for. Of course some things have to be cut out for the sake of time in a movie, and movie makers often want to make their movie more exciting and add more action and such. Below is a list, not by any means exhaustive, of the things that stuck out to me the most, for good, bad, or neutral (mostly for bad, in my opinion).

Spoiler notice: Since it’s too difficult to explain these differences without spoiling the book, I’ll just say that if you haven’t read it or watched the movie and don’t want to be spoiled, don’t read on.

  • I definitely read “Henri” as the French version, since in the book, he has an accent that is reminiscent of French and chose his name to match. In the movie, he’s just “Henry.” This probably bothers me more than it should.
  • Henri is…cold, gruff, not at all like the firm but kind Henri in the book. His relationship with Four is also not close and father-and-son-like.
  • Sarah is also pretty cold when she meets John, which is unlike the book.
  • In the movie, Henri doesn’t want John to go to school when they move to Ohio; John insists. This kind of just adds to the feeling I get that these don’t care as much about each other as they do in the book.
  • We know from the beginning that Bernie Kosar was the gecko in Florida, though not that he’s a protector. I liked the reveal of him being special (though I had begun to suspect anyway), but at least there’s (so far) suspense for the viewer about him being alien, but not knowing if he’s good or bad.
  • There is no explanation of the scars (which I’m pretty sure are supposed to be stripes, not spirals) as something they expect, no charm that forces them to be killed in order. The movie  Mogodorians are apparently just OCD.
  • He doesn’t know about his Legacies until the first one hits!!! And his ability to throw really hard is…new and surprising? In the book, he and Henri are anticipating his Legacies, and super strength, speed, etc. are common to all Garde, yet it’s clearly not something he expected in the movie.
  • The Lumen turned off so much more quickly in the movie than in the book. Like, it really wasn’t even all that hard on him. And in the end, he has flashlights on his hands, but he never becomes fireproof. But apparently Six is fireproof?
  • And then he sneaks out like someone who has no regard for his or his guardian’s life…and suddenly he can perform acrobatics and is quickly figuring out all sorts of stuff he can do randomly…there’s just no real logic behind any of it, and he doesn’t really have to work for any of it.
  • John in the book makes some mistakes, but generally understands the stakes and listens to Henri. Movie John is willfully disobedient and just stupid, like blowing out lights along the street for fun.
  • Sam gets an answer about his dad in the movie…that really surprised me!
  • Henri tells John to bring others together, which in the book was a huge decision John had to make on his own, since doing so would break the charm that kept them mostly safe. Though I guess it’s not as scary of a prospect in the movie, since the charm doesn’t exist.
  • Henri dies much earlier in the movie.

There’s more involving Number Six and their abilities and powers that was different, but it was mostly minor in comparison and seemed more neutral if anything. It’s a little sad that I liked the movie before, but after reading the book, it just didn’t feel right. I’m glad they didn’t make more like they had originally planned. I’ve seen that there might be a reboot, and I’d certainly give that a chance too, but this first one just didn’t do the book justice, in my opinion.

Have you read the book? Seen the movie? What are your thoughts on either, or both?

Book Review: The Last of the Mohicans (adapted for younger readers)

/ Kristi / Leave a comment

The Last of the Mohicans
by James Fenimore Cooper, adapted by Eliza Gatewood Warren

My rating: 4 / 5
Genre: Classic, children’s

It’s difficult to know whether to rate books like this based on the story or on the adaptation. I’ve never read the original book and only vaguely remember seeing the movie when I was younger (I remember my dad watching it a lot). The only thing I really remember is some romance and a cave behind a waterfall. Anyway, in an adaptation like this, it’s no surprise to find a lot more telling than showing, as the adapter not only needs to shorten the story but also explain things in simple language. I think it gets the overall story across fine, though without the depth the original would have. And most likely without some emotion. In the end, I felt like the main thing that was lacking was a real connection between Hawkeye and Chingachgook, considering that the ending makes a big deal out of their friendship.

What is especially difficult about reviewing or recommending this book, though, is that it’s meant for kids, yet it’s full of violence and death. I’m sure the original is more so, of course. But I can only imagine the illustrator’s remarks about some of the illustrations he/she was asked to draw: “You want him being shot?” “So the knife should be bloody in this one?” “How many will be lying dead on the ground in this scene?” “Oh, she’s about to be scalped? Taken away to be forced to be his wife? Sure, no problem.”  So in the end, I think I’d recommend this book be read with your kids, so you can talk about the harsh reality of life during wartime.

Find out more about this The Last of the Mohicans adaptation

See what I’m reading next.

If you’ve read this book, or read it in the future, feel free to let me know what you think!

Book Review: Pride and Prejudice (adapted for younger readers)

/ Kristi / Leave a comment

Pride and Prejudice
by Jane Austen, adapted by Fern Siegel

My rating: 4 / 5
Genre: Classic children’s, romance

It’s difficult to know whether to rate books like this based on the story or on the adaptation. I gave the original book 4 stars and liked some aspects of this book better. It does a great job of cutting through the old-fashioned language and getting to the heart of the story. In this case, “telling” instead of “showing” both shortens the length of the story and explains what might otherwise be difficult for younger readers to comprehend or follow.

However, I had some issues with feeling like the book left something out now and then. A couple of times, the text seemed to refer to something that hadn’t been explained in the first place. I could remember it, if vaguely, from my reading of the original book, but it seemed to have been missing from the adaptation. For that reason, I gave the adaptation 4 stars. Overall, I like the idea of this story, but it just seems a little too…I don’t know, maybe bloated? for me. Still, I do think this adaptation more than adequately makes the classic accessible and would recommend this book for children around 8-12, with the extra note that with younger kids, it might be helpful (and enjoyable) to read it with a parent or older sibling/friend.

Find out more about this Pride and Prejudice adaptation

See what I’m reading next.

If you’ve read this book, or read it in the future, feel free to let me know what you think!

Book Review: Little Women (adapted for younger readers)

/ Kristi / 2 Comments

Little Women
by Louisa May Alcott, adapted by Lucia Monfried

My/my daughter’s rating: 4.5 / 5
Genre: Classic children’s, coming of age

Little Women adaptation.png

The classic tale of the March sisters as they become women around and after the time of the American Civil War is adapted for children around age 8-10 in this book, complete with an illustration for every 2 pages. I read the book aloud with my daughter, who is 9, and am writing this review based more on her opinion of the book than my own.

I knew the story fairly well already, having seen the 1994 movie adaptation, though I’ve never read the original book (yet). My daughter was new to the story though, and overall, she really enjoyed it. The rating reflects how much she liked it, and the missing half a star was because she was super disappointed with a particular pairing that did not happen in the book (I know this book is old, but I can’t seem to bring myself to spoil it anyway, just in case).

Though I worried that much of what I was reading to her was going to go above her head, even with the adaptation, she was able to understand most of it as we went. Or if she didn’t understand something, she didn’t really realize that she didn’t. Now and then I’d stop and explain something that I thought she might not get (usually because of vernacular that is not in use these days) or that she questioned as we went.

I would recommend this book for children around 8-12, with the extra note that with younger kids, it might be helpful (and enjoyable) to read it with a parent or older sibling/friend.

Find out more about this Little Women adaptation

See what I’m reading next.

If you’ve read this book, or read it in the future, feel free to let me know what you think!

Book Review: The Martian

/ Kristi / 2 Comments

The Martian
by Andy Weir

My rating: 4.5 / 5
Genre: Sci-fi drama, suspense

Martian

Following a dust storm that forced an evacuation from the surface of Mars, astronaut Mark Whatney is left behind, presumed dead. But he’s very much alive, and must now figure out how to survive alone on Mars while back on Earth, they work on how to bring him home.

I watched this movie a few years ago (as research for a mini escape room I helped build), and I really liked it. The book is even better! Whatney is resourceful and determined. The repertoire between him and the rest of his team is fun and touching. The determination of those back on Earth to do whatever they can to help him survive is really interesting too.

The book has a lot of explanation about the different sides of what Whatney needs to survive. Ideas are thrown out and dismissed for better ones. It has such a real feel to it, as if it were any other modern space mission that went wrong. The genre is sci-fi, and it’s obviously a bit in the future, but the science isn’t far out there. It’s just a bit past what we have now.

The format of the book was interesting. Much of the narration comes from journal entries by Whatney, so it basically reads like 1st person. Then there is the 3rd person narration of what happens back on Earth. There are other formats, but explaining that would be a bit spoilery. I enjoyed feeling like Whatney was sharing his experience directly with us.

I watched the movie again a few days after finishing the book. I still think the movie is good, but like with many adaptations, they weren’t able to reach the depth of characterization that the book did. Plus, some harrowing moments and difficulties that Whatney faced were completely written out for the movie. Still, a good movie, and a great book!

Find out more about The Martian

See what’s coming up.

If you’ve read this book, or read it in the future, feel free to let me know what you think!

Book vs. Movie: Thr3e

/ Kristi / Leave a comment

3 movie vs book

This movie originally came out in 2006. I watched it in the theater, but I don’t actually remember much about it. I’ve had the DVD for years, and only re-watched it recently after re-reading the book for the first time in over 10 years. It was…not great, unfortunately. Part of that is the curse of most faith-based movies, where the production quality isn’t what we normally look for. For example, even though several of the actors I’ve seen in other things (like Marc Blucas), and they were perfectly fine in those other things, most of the acting seemed stiff.

Past that, I had some notes about things that were different from the book that I felt detracted from the story, one that I liked in the movie, and one that was mostly neutral. Fair warning, the rest of this post will be full of spoilers!

Continue reading →

Book vs. Movie: Ready Player One

/ Kristi / 2 Comments

RP1 movie vs book

I watched the movie about a week and a half after I finished the book. At first, I wanted to watch the movie quickly, before I forgot details about the book. Only a few minutes into the movie, I thought it might have been better to have waited several months (or more) to watch the movie. Maybe forgetting the details of the book would have allowed me to enjoy it in its own right. I understand that movies adapted from books have to be changed for various reasons, whether that’s to shorten the story, to add excitement, or even because a lot of what happens in the book is internal (which would be fairly hard/boring to show). And there are other reasons too. But that doesn’t mean I have to like it!

In my review of the book, I gave it a rating of 3.5 out of 5. It’s intriguing to me that the movie actually gave me more appreciation for the book. I’d probably rate it higher now. As with other posts I’ve made, some of my notes about what I didn’t care for in the movie are personal preference. Some of them, though, are places where I don’t think the movie did justice to the book, or even where I felt the movie just didn’t do well in general. I am going to give my notes, but without too much detail, mostly because my list is a little too long to go into much detail here. These are by no means all of the differences between the book and the movie, just the ones that bothered me. Also, I’m splitting these notes into things that aren’t too spoilery (shown first), and then notes that I feel would spoil either the book or movie enough to give a proper warning for.

Note: There are a lot, so it probably seems like I’m ranting. Well, I am. Again, I am well aware that movie adaptations are often very different from the book. If you think I’m being unfair, that’s fine. I didn’t realize how many notes I had about this until I started writing them down, and I considered cutting it short. But in the end, I decided to keep them all (and frankly, there may be some I forgot). So read on, or jump ship right now; it’s up to you!

  • From the very beginning of the movie, the atmosphere didn’t feel right to me. When I read the book, I got a feeling of desolation and isolation in the real world, especially where Wade lived. People didn’t go out much, because they could do much more from the comfort of their couch (and because the real world was fairly dangerous). But we first see Wade outside of his “home,” and it’s pretty lively. People are shown outside a lot during the movie, and it just felt wrong.
  • The book was heavy in 80s pop culture references. The movie expanded that to just general pop culture, but even that was very light (I get that a lot of this might have been copyright issues, but it’s still worth mentioning).
  • In the book, Wade started out overweight (spent most of his life in a virtual environment, after all), but had a physical transformation once he gained the means to be active while also in the OASIS. There was no change of this sort in the movie.
  • Also, in the book, Wade started out completely destitute. The things he had to do to make any progress in the OASIS showed ingenuity and a real struggle. This was barely touched on in the movie.
  • Because The Hunt had gone on for years already when the book started, everyone who was hunting (called gunters) knew pretty much everything there was to know about Halliday, his life, and every book, movie, video game, song, or TV show that he liked. In the movie, Wade was explaining how he’d figured out a clue to other gunters often, and it really bothered me that he knew so much more than the others.
  • Though I said in my original review that the time that Wade was alone (pushed away his friends) was not a time I enjoyed, I realized watching the movie that I missed it when it didn’t happen. Most likely, that means I didn’t enjoy it because it was depressing (which it was meant to be), not that it was a bad story element.
  • I loved Ogden Morrow’s role in the book. In the movie it was kinda…meh (and it seemed like a waste of Simon Pegg).
  • It really bugged me that they called the IOI gunters Sixers, but had absolutely no explanation as to why. It wouldn’t have been difficult to explain it. Even not coming from a book, it was an unnecessary lack of explanation.
  • Similarly, in the book, the first 5 gunters to find the first key were known as the “High Five,” because of their positions on the almighty leader board. When watching the movie, I’d completely forgotten about that until some time in the last 20-30 minutes when Wade uses that term to reference those 5 characters, and I actually sat up and said, “Wait, what?! How are we supposed to know what he means by that, when this is the first time anyone’s said it?”

Before I go into the spoilers, I want to mention a few things about the movie that I liked:

  • The visual effects in the OASIS were great. Much better than I could imagine in my head, I’m sure. I also enjoyed the way it looked when characters accessed things from their inventory and such. I’ve had dreams about actually being inside a game world, i.e. being my character, and it reminded me a bit of that. (Is that weird?)
  • There were some nods to some of the things in the book that weren’t used in the movie at all, which was nice. Seeing the planet Ludus early in the movie, for example, made me smile.

Below here are the rest of my notes, which have what I would consider spoilers. Read on at your own discretion.

Continue reading →