![]() He disagreed with the changes so strongly that the writer requested his name be removed from the film’s credits. Before the film version came out, Moore read the script, which makes several changes that deemphasizes the politics of the original comic and adds parallels to the George W. While writing the comic, Moore based the political situation of his imagined future Britain very obviously on the Margaret Thatcher administration. Moore’s original graphic novel from 1988 is a dystopian story about a future fascist Britain and the masked V (played in the film by Hugo Weaving), who attempts to destroy a totalitarian government in the country. One film adaptation he did have specific criticisms of was James McTeigue and the Wachowskis’ 2006 film version of “V for Vendetta.” ![]() The “Watchmen” writer so famously detests adaptations of his work that he’s essentially stopped watching them all together. You could make an entire list out of the Alan Moore adaptations that the legendary comic book writer has trashed. Image Credit: ©Warner Bros/Courtesy Everett Collection Pearce also claimed that he received very little royalties for the film’s breakout success. In a 2005 interview with Esquire, Pearce admitted he punched someone during his last day on set playing a minor character over the frustration of shooting, and that he was never invited to the film’s premiere. ![]() He hated the casting of Newman as Luke, feeling that the sex symbol was too “small” and “wispy” to play the character. Pearce had several other issues with the film and how it adapted the book, which was inspired by his own experiences in a Florida prison. He called the “failure to communicate” moment “a stupid fucking line,” saying that a prison captain would be a redneck who would never say anything so sophisticated. Pierson was hired to rewrite it and Pearce was critical of his changes. Although the author penned the initial draft of the script, Frank R. But said line doesn’t appear at any point in the original Donn Pearce novel, and Pearce explained that he didn’t write the line. Image Credit: Courtesy Everett CollectionĮasily the most iconic line of the 1967 Paul Newman-in-prison film “Cool Hand Luke” - “ What we’ve got here is failure to communicate…” - was brilliantly delivered by Strother Martin. With editorial contributions from Wilson Chapman. (Titles are listed in no particular order.) Then, try our guide to The 15 Best Book-to-TV Adaptations. To get you in the spirit of risky, will-they-fail literary adaptations in a fall full of them, take a look back at some of the most controversial book-to-film revamps ever, including ones deplored by audiences as well as disowned by their authors. And though it’s somehow not done yet, Hulu’s Elisabeth Moss-starring “The Handmaid’s Tale” adaptation - and all increasingly batshit narrative decisions therein - inspired Margaret Atwood to repeatedly remind fans she has no control over the show. Martin feeling left in the cold by the finale of HBO’s “Game of Thrones” and vowing to make it right with his ensuing series of follow-up “Song of Ice and Fire” books. Plenty has gone awry on the TV side of adaptations too, with George R.R. Keen-eyed readers disappointed with the disheveled melodrama might be inclined to go back to the source material and figure out where it all went wrong. “Deep Water” was an incomprehensible cluster of decidedly non-ethical polyamory, murder, and snails led by Ben Affleck and Ana de Armas on Hulu. Last year, psychosexual-thriller auteur Adrian Lyne coughed up a Patricia Highsmith adaptation so bad that, may she rest in peace and not be alive to give notes, might send its author reeling. Finn, an author whose rocky backstory could easily fill its own movie (or even a limited series). The story of a boozy agoraphobic voyeur played by Amy Adams, the film was adapted from an already controversial page-turner by A.J. Take Joe Wright’s notorious 2020 Netflix thriller “The Woman in the Window”: a film that loop-de-looped through so many ups and downs - from uneasy test screenings and rewrites and re-shoots to a big-money handoff from now-defunct Fox 2000 to the streamer - it never stood a chance of coming out the other end as anything less than mangled. The best literary adaptations mine something newly cinematic from their source material at worst, they’re so doggedly faithful to the text that the end result feels nervously redundant or like an overly gutsy cash grab. We’ve all heard it before: the book was better.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |