History is written by the victor

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by frau kaleun

Eh, it's okay, but nothing spectacular IMO, despite starring James Mason (who I adore).

I was disappointed at how closely it followed the book - meaning, the movie felt to me like they just filmed the book "as is," instead of taking the book's subject matter and crafting a really fine movie based on it. Since I'd already read the book the movie kind of left me flat... it seemed like just a series of vignettes dramatizing a few major moments in Rommel's life, strung together by a lot of voiceover narration representing the book's author (and a lot of the narration was taken, IIRC, almost word for word from the book).

Wait... what? Someone complaining that the movie was too much like the book? Has this ever happened before?

Isn't the one complaint about any movie based on a book that is deviated from the book in some way? (The one reason why I hate the end of Flight of the Intruder)

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

Isn't the one complaint about any movie based on a book that is deviated from the book in some way?

Well, there's always Die Hard, in which case the film was much better than the book.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Well, there's always Die Hard, in which case the film was much better than the book.

Bruce Willis could star in the movie adaptation of a cookbook and he would make it awesome!

[Jimbuna]

Yeah, the Die Hard series were kinda special.

I also enjoyed the Lethal Weapon series.

[frau kaleun]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

Wait... what? Someone complaining that the movie was too much like the book? Has this ever happened before?

Isn't the one complaint about any movie based on a book that is deviated from the book in some way? (The one reason why I hate the end of Flight of the Intruder)

I don't know if I can explain it better. Obviously I don't object that the movie followed the book in the sense that it didn't invent a lot of stuff to make the story more exciting or sexy or whatever the studio thought it needed to make $$ or because some screenwriter thought he could write a more interesting version of someone's life than they actually lived.

But the movie felt to me like it relied too heavily on the book stylistically. Watching the movie for me was kind of like having someone read the book out loud to me, with actors coming along to act out bits and pieces of the story. But they weren't telling the story, some voice representing the book's author was doing that.