Film adaptations of books that don't work very well

[Snake Plissken]

The first film is ok, I couldn’t get more than 15 minutes into the second one.

I haven’t read the books, but my understanding is the character in the books is, among other things, much taller.

I guess Tom Cruise outbid other producers interested in doing the films or maybe nobody else interested was famous enough to get it done.

In the books, Reacher is 6 foot 3 in both directions, a mixture of the Hulk, Rambo and Sherlock Holmes. The plots are generally Reacher using deduction and occasional violence to calmly and methodically dismantle the villains plans or reveal the plot. The second film took a minor subplot that had been across several books before becoming a main story and just dropped you into it.

Lee Child actually said that he wouldn't have agreed to Cruise playing him if he'd known what a shitstorm it would raise. I don't believe him on that and there was quite a queue to make movies from the books. But if Tom Cruise if offering you lots of money, then I won't blame anyone for taking it.

I still say you could make some really good mini-series from some of the books with very little changing. Looking at the list... Die Trying, Tripwire, Bad Luck and Trouble, Nothing to Lose, 61 Hours and The Affair definitely. And Persuader would have made an excellent two hour movie or three hour short. If they can spin Jakc Ryan out to 8-10 episodes, they can definitely do it with Reacher. You could tell Child was a writer for TV beforehand.

[Hot Pepsi]

Went straight to TV, didn't it?

(And wasn't rotoscoped like the Bakshi version? )

Yeah. It was an animated “TV Special.” Back when those were a thing.

Kids born after about 1980 will never know the excitement created by this:

[Hot Pepsi]

In the books, Reacher is 6 foot 3 in both directions, a mixture of the Hulk, Rambo and Sherlock Holmes. The plots are generally Reacher using deduction and occasional violence to calmly and methodically dismantle the villains plans or reveal the plot. The second film took a minor subplot that had been across several books before becoming a main story and just dropped you into it.

Lee Child actually said that he wouldn't have agreed to Cruise playing him if he'd known what a shitstorm it would raise. I don't believe him on that and there was quite a queue to make movies from the books. But if Tom Cruise if offering you lots of money, then I won't blame anyone for taking it.

I still say you could make some really good mini-series from some of the books with very little changing. Looking at the list... Die Trying, Tripwire, Bad Luck and Trouble, Nothing to Lose, 61 Hours and The Affair definitely. And Persuader would have made an excellent two hour movie or three hour short. If they can spin Jakc Ryan out to 8-10 episodes, they can definitely do it with Reacher. You could tell Child was a writer for TV beforehand.

Somebody will try to make in into TV eventually, I suspect.

Jack Ryan is pretty much a blank slate. Nice guy analyst compelled to become an action hero with advice from “I’m too old for this shit” boss and ever-patient fantasy doctor wife.

[Patrick Thistle]

I may have mentioned this before but Mrs Thistle was so disappointed by what they did with The Cat in the Hat it's the closest I've ever seen her to crying in the cinema.

[elguapo4]

I've said this before elsewhere but War of the Worlds Is a terrific book, which should be easy to make as a film, and apart from the 1953 version with Gene Barry, every version has been shit. Mainly because they can't resist tampering with the source material. By tampering read totally ignoring,

[Patrick Thistle]

I've said this before elsewhere but War of the Worlds Is a terrific book, which should be easy to make as a film, and apart from the 1953 version with Gene Barry, every version has been shit. Mainly because they can't resist tampering with the source material. By tampering read totally ignoring,

I'd nominate Day of the Triffids as a similar classic that has rarely translated well to the big screen. But that might just be because of how much I like the original book.

[Hot Pepsi]

I've said this before elsewhere but War of the Worlds Is a terrific book, which should be easy to make as a film, and apart from the 1953 version with Gene Barry, every version has been shit. Mainly because they can't resist tampering with the source material. By tampering read totally ignoring,

I’m only familiar with the Tom Cruise version. Were there others after 1953?

[pebblethefish]

Well, the BBC did a mini series of it recently. It was only three episodes, I had to force myself to watch the second one, and couldn't be arsed with the third. Judging by others' reactions on Current Watching thread, that was a wise choice.

[elguapo4]

There was a couple of efforts in the 80s and 90s as well. The BBC one was an atrocity. The 1953 one at least gave the impression that the scriptwriters had read the book.

[Snake Plissken]

I thought that the idea of the recent one was that it was based on the book - set in Victorian times etc and so forth.

[elguapo4]

The title and the era were the only things they kept .

[Hot Pepsi]

It’s kinda hard to recreate the shock and surprise that an alien invasion story must have created in the 19th century. Now that’s just a genre and usually a cliche. When he wrote it, it was mind-blowing.

[tracteurgarcon]

The title and the era were the only things they kept .

They didn’t even keep the era, I think they’d moved it forward in time about 20 years or so, for reasons best known to someone somewhere I guess.

[tracteurgarcon]

They didn’t even keep the era, I think they’d moved it forward in time about 20 years or so, for reasons best known to someone somewhere I guess.

Just looked it up and it was more like 10.