On New Year's Day, Sherlock came back for its second series. It was shown in the UK at 8;10pm, fifty minutes before the official watershed. Naturally, the Daily Mail complained about this show because it existed. Before the 9pm watershed, Lara Pulver (who I know more from Spooks) played Irene Adler... and not much else. She was stark naked, although you couldn't see that. Of the ten million people who watched it, one hundred people complained. Save you doing the maths, that's 0.001% of viewers who had a problem with it.
I personally loved it. Having read the books (well, two), I found the show quite interesting, and subplots were tied into it to keep it interesting. Not only this, the way it was filmed was incredible, especially the texts sent. I also believed it to be cast well, written well and just generally be good.
However, not all book-to-movie/tv shows are not this brilliant. I personally thought the Harry Potter movies were badly done. Although the acting was good in places, written well in places, it could have been done better.
Eragon. I watched the last half or so, and it was awful. Yes, the book wasn't incredible, but the ending was just... incorrect.
And then there are the successes
A Clockwork Orange. Haven't watched the movie, but it was banned for years, so they must be doing something right.
Stardust. I thought the book and movie was very similar (although Neil Gaiman did help with the screenplay, I've heard)
When you watch a book-to-screen conversion, there's always that gamble. One choice, of course, is to never watch the movie (I refused to watch The Spiderwick Chronicles because of how much I love the books), or to never read the book (...yep, I don't have an example to give you). But you always find a sense of emptiness, not being able to enjoy a book on every platform.
This all leads to the release of The Hunger Games in March. I haven't read the book, and don't really intend to (my understanding is that it's a romance novel), however the concept of the movie sounds interesting, and one that I shall most likely see.
I personally loved it. Having read the books (well, two), I found the show quite interesting, and subplots were tied into it to keep it interesting. Not only this, the way it was filmed was incredible, especially the texts sent. I also believed it to be cast well, written well and just generally be good.
However, not all book-to-movie/tv shows are not this brilliant. I personally thought the Harry Potter movies were badly done. Although the acting was good in places, written well in places, it could have been done better.
Eragon. I watched the last half or so, and it was awful. Yes, the book wasn't incredible, but the ending was just... incorrect.
And then there are the successes
A Clockwork Orange. Haven't watched the movie, but it was banned for years, so they must be doing something right.
Stardust. I thought the book and movie was very similar (although Neil Gaiman did help with the screenplay, I've heard)
When you watch a book-to-screen conversion, there's always that gamble. One choice, of course, is to never watch the movie (I refused to watch The Spiderwick Chronicles because of how much I love the books), or to never read the book (...yep, I don't have an example to give you). But you always find a sense of emptiness, not being able to enjoy a book on every platform.
This all leads to the release of The Hunger Games in March. I haven't read the book, and don't really intend to (my understanding is that it's a romance novel), however the concept of the movie sounds interesting, and one that I shall most likely see.
0 comments:
Post a Comment