Cinema Fans Argue That It’s Not About Faithfulness to the Source Material
Forgot password
Enter the email address you used when you joined and we'll send you instructions to reset your password.
If you used Apple or Google to create your account, this process will create a password for your existing account.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Reset password instructions sent. If you have an account with us, you will receive an email within a few minutes.
Something went wrong. Try again or contact support if the problem persists.
Image via Warner Bros.

‘Blade Runner,’ ‘The Shining,’ and more prove not all movies should stick to the source material

Adapting a book is a trickier business than many cinemagoers understand.

The matter of live-action adaptations is a hotly debated topic in movie circles, and after decades of learning and growing with all of these projects, cinephiles have yet to reach a consensus as to what actually amounts to a great adaptation of a literary masterpiece.

Recommended Videos

Many would argue that everything starts to break apart the moment the producers veer away from the source material. You could probably name dozens of movies off the top of your head whose original book counterpart did a much better job of telling that particular story, but as some eagle-eyed members of the community have recently pointed out, for every failed adaptation that undermined the original narrative to their detriment, there is one movie that not only got away with it but turned into an absolute timeless classic.

This new Reddit thread has compelled hundreds of people to chime in with their picks for the movies that weren’t faithful to the books, and the result really puts the whole “adaptations suck because they don’t stick to the source material” argument to question.

One great example is the Bourne trilogy, starring Matt Damon.

Comment
byu/mesonofgib from discussion
inmovies

The 2006 dystopian sci-fi thriller Children of Men was also very different from the book, but even the author had to acknowledge what Alfonso Cuarón managed to achieve in his 2-hour flick.

Comment
byu/mesonofgib from discussion
inmovies

And then there are masterpieces like Blade Runner, Forrest Gump, and even Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining.

Comment
byu/mesonofgib from discussion
inmovies

Honestly, the list goes on and on; The Truman Show, Fight Club, Jaws, Die Hard, The Godfather, Jurassic Park, The Lord of the Rings. Fans always say Peter Jackson captured the spirit of Tolkien’s world with his celebrated trilogy, but the sheer number of changes he made to the books would baffle you.

It seems that we really need to change our outlook towards adaptations. With five decades of cinema lending us hindsight, the conclusion should be resoundingly obvious, because it isn’t faithfulness that ultimately determines an adaptation’s success, but whether the people involved have been able to tell a great story with relatable characters.


We Got This Covered is supported by our audience. When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn a small affiliate commission. Learn more about our Affiliate Policy
Author
Image of Jonathan Wright
Jonathan Wright
Jonathan is a religious consumer of movies, TV shows, video games, and speculative fiction. And when he isn't doing that, he likes to write about them. He can get particularly worked up when talking about 'The Lord of the Rings' or 'A Song of Ice and Fire' or any work of high fantasy, come to think of it.