I LOVE Alfonso Cuarón’s sci-fi action movie Children of Men. I’ve watched maybe six times and every time, the ending always almost brings me to tears. So when I learned it was adapted from P.D. James’ book of the same name, it was a no-brainer deciding what my next book would be.

After finishing the book, it wasn’t difficult to reach to the conclusion that I enjoyed the movie better.

While James’ book gives a more in-depth look at how human infertility and humanity’s slow death march towards extinction affects the sexual dynamic between men and women and almost demented ways humans try to cope with a world without children or a race of dead men walking, I feel the book dedicates WAY too much time describing the failing of human civilization and the Regrets and guilt of Theo Faron. It’s not even until after 2/3 through the book where it feels like the plot and story are properly paced and stuff of consequence actually begin to happen.

The film’s adaptation by, comparison, feels consistent in its pacing and the world building and woe-is-mes of Theo feel more compact a take up less of the audience’s time.

What books do you feel were worse than its film adaptation and why?

  • jenh6@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    How to be single. I actually thought this was a decent movie about enjoying where you are at in life. The book was about all these obnoxious women where it made sense why they were single.
    The princess diaries. Sure it was fun at parts but overall MIa was pretty annoying.
    Controversy but LOTR. The movies are perfection but the books are outdated and overrated. I’m a huge fantasy fan too.
    The devil wears prada! Maybe this is elevated by the two leads but overall I thought the movie made great changes and was fun to watch.
    The maze runner films and insurgent. I thought these made enjoyable action films