Runs with scissors discussion

I normally blast adaptations of books made into movies, but I realized something last night while watching the recent remake of the 1939 movie "The Women" (one of my faves) which was based on the play by Clare Booth Luce. While,I have not had the pleasure of seeing the play as of yet, but I do know a few people who have seen or been in it, and they tell me the movie is pretty much verbatim. The re-make is updated, and well done at that, yet I felt a little miss-cast for some of the key characters (what else is new?) but I felt that Diane English (the creator of "Murphy Brown") did a pretty nice job of it.

It got me thinking about several movies I have seen done based on Shakespeare that have been well done, and even one or two movies that have been turned into stage plays or musicals and had those versions re-made into a movie (i.e "The Producers"). For some reason, Hollywood can manage not bollocks up a play, but can and do routinely manage to @#$%up books on a regular basis.

Is this because plays have less to deal with as far as plot or scenery or is it that plays can change actors and we accept that as opposed to who we see in out minds eye when it comes to a descriptive book?

Let's hear your thoughts on the subject!

Plays are created to be acted out by people, so EVERYTHING has to be done with physical and visual cues and setups in mind. In books, a LOT of the plot and character development is NOT able to be translated to the screen (he thought about what had happened, she wanted to kill him, they remembered the things that their mother did, etc etc etc). Books, if properly translated to film, would likely take several hours to convey. Gone With the Wind, for example, was pretty well done from what I remember having only seen it once, and was a VERY long movie. Modern movie goers will not sit through long films like that, so teh directors and producer have to get what they think are the most important elements into the plot.

Excellent point. I hadn't considered that. GWTW is an excellent example of a good adaptation of a book to a movie, and one of my faves. 'Course, that was made when you went to the movies expecting an intermission, cartoon shorts, news reels,and other pre-movie entertainment. Movies used to be a form of entertainment that was meant for everyone, not just the wealthy or "cultured". With I-pods, You-Tube, texting, sexting, etc., entertainment has reached a saturation level that has to compete with attention spans of fleas. I wonder how todays kids would have reacted to t.v. as we knew it growing up, you know, no cable, no VCR/DVD's,a few local stations and heaven help you if the president came on!

I rembered a book that was made into a movie and one I just saw that were adapted pretty well. One I forgot about and one I just watched this weekend. First, "The Princess Bride" was pretty well done.

The second one, and this surprised me based on the DVD box's description, "The Tale of Despereaux" which follows the book at about a 90% rate of accuracy. The stuff they added worked though. I was very pleased.