Losing Points for Faithfulness to Source

[Truth Seeker]

But it was horribly mutilated, none the less.

I don't think it's at all important to stay close to the source. If it's good, then people won't care that it takes vast liberties. Case in point: no-one complains that Toshiro Mifune is not Scottish in the remake of King Lear, and likewise no-one complains that Clint Eastwood is not Japanese in the remake of Yojimbo.

However, if the remake is bad, then the fact that there are deviations will be used to say how bad the remake is. I think this is a distraction. Would Earthsea really have been better if cast ethnically correct? Probably not.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I love the film "The Iron Giant". It is one of my favourite (fairly) recent animations.

I just found a copy of the original book today and read it. Thank goodness for the wholesale changes made from the book to the cinema screen! I think the only thing that survived the transition is the names of Hogarth and the Iron Giant, but the film is SO much better for it!

Just thought I'd throw that one in. Because if the film had been completely faithful to the source, it would have been atrocious. (IMO)

 

[Brown Jenkin]

I loved the LotR movies but I would love an explanation for why the whole Aragorn falls off a cliff in Rohan bit that was added.

 

[Hand of Evil]

To me it comes down to how pivotal the scene is, if it was important enough in the story it should at least been as close as possible on the big screen. This does not mean it has to be 100% but at least 85% faithful to the story (if that makes sense).

 

[GSHamster]

My perspective is that tv/movies should show deference to the author. After all, the work is popular because of the creator's design, and that should be respected.

If a scene needs to be changed because it doesn't work in a visual medium, that's one thing. But characterization and basic plot are the creator's work, and should be left alone.