Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Evanovich at the movies
Really. I'd like to know why readers feel they "must" go see a movie based on a book they enjoyed. We all know that the movies based on said books are never "just like the book". We all know that all too often, the movies are much, much worse than the original books. Indeed, there are times where the title of the movie is the only thing linking it to a book!
Are we, the readers, doing our favorite authors/characters a disservice by paying Hollywood to rework something we loved in print? Or do we really consider it support of those authors, just as if we bought another copy of the book? Wouldn't it be better to keep spreading the word of the print version and get the author more overall sales?
If there are any authors reading this blog (and gosh, I certainly hope there are) what do you think? Do you have dreams of your book(s) coming to life on the big screen? Or do you have nightmares about what might happen to your literary vision?
As for me, I don't watch movies too often to begin with - I am a reader, dammit! And I rarely want to watch a film based on a book, especially a book I've already read. Every once in a while I'm surprised by a very good treatment of the original written piece, but yeah, there are stinkers out there that have made me groan in actual pain. Just take a look at any number of Stephen King pieces: for every "Stand by Me" (based on his original novella "The Body"), you've got something like "Sleepwalkers", a movie best summed up by a guy sitting near me during a preview, sho said "Dude, that would have totally rocked if we were stoned!"
Let me know what you think. Movies based on books - good idea? Or should scriptwriters stick to coming up with their own ideas?