The Children of Men - Book vs Movie

[bigdaddy]

I love the movie, I think it is one of the best filmed movies of the last decade, it's really amazing, really moving and beautifully filmed. Clive Owen is still pretty annoying but it fits the role.

I just bought the book The Children of Men for a $1, I'm on page 25ish, and I think I want my money back.

The way the book is written like a half ass journal is just insane, it just doesn't at all feel natural. I'm already sick of him writing about Xan, let's move on already. Plus do people use that much dialog in their journals? Like I said the journal feel is really not working for me at all, I just can't join the world through a badly written journal.

I think The Children of Men movie will be one of the few movies that is better than the book it is based on. Anyone else read and watched them?

 

[WillsBabe]

I have the film on my hard drive to watch this week, it was on the tv last night. So, I haven't seen it, or read the book. I have to say that the convention of writing a novel in journal or letter style is pretty old, but it's one that I've never really got on with, personally. So, I can understand your pain!

 

[Mr Light]

I absolutely loved the movie and bought the book... and put it down after 12 pages or so. It was a mite different!

 

[stj]

Good action movie, bad science fiction novel. It is a bad novel that makes a better movie.

 

[Emher]

Haven't tried reading the book but after really trying to read another of P.D. James' books (A certain justice) and just not being able to even get trough a third of it, I'm not surprised.

 

[Chaos Descending]

This is some irony, eh? If the book is really as bad as it seems, one wonders how anyone even bothered to make it into a film!

By the way, the film is one of my favorites.

 

[bigdaddy]

It get's better!

I cheated and skipped to "Book 2", the first 135 pages is called "Omega" and the second part is called "Alpha" and it is written in the third person!

She is a horrible writer! As of 1992 she had 7 books made into TV specials... why I do not know.

It explains why the movie did so poorly, everyone thought it would be like the horrible book!

Also during the first 10 pages he brought up his cousin Xan and how they never did anything sexual or sensual or something equally as creepy, it's like he loves his cousin in a few sick way.

 

[Starbreaker]

The plot synopsis of the book didn't even look appealing to me, which is shocking considering how good the film was. There are only two times that I have liked the movie more than the book: The Prestige and Contact.

 

[bigdaddy]

I have never read Contact but isn't it completely different than the movie?

The only other movie I can think of that is better than the book is Jurassic Park: The Lost World. No the movie isn't nearly as great as the first, and yes they rip off Godzilla at the end, but damn the book was bad!

Also for your spelling tips...

It's a lot, not alot.

 

[Allyn Gibson]

Good action movie, bad science fiction novel. It is a bad novel that makes a better movie.

P.D. James would tell you that it's not a science fiction novel. Just like Margaret Atwood would tell you that The Handmaid's Tale is not a science fiction novel. They don't want the genre label on their works.

 

[Starbreaker]

I have never read Contact but isn't it completely different than the movie?

The time frame is much longer, and there are at least 4 others that take the trip at the end. I think the movie does much better by taking the source material and making it about Ellie's personal journal.

Here is a quick interview with Alfonso Cuarno you guys might like:

http://www.internetwritingjournal.com/blog/108071

Apparently PD James really loved the movie.

 

[bigdaddy]

She loves it because she realizes they took her trash of a novel and made it into a great sci-fi movie.

 

[bigdaddy]

It gets worse!

It's been 27 years since he ran over his 15 month old daughter and he said "I would have cared about her more if she was prettier!"

What the fuck is this?!

 

[ring]

Writer must be beaming with joy, and got a lot of money if she had signed the contract..
thats obvious she is not a fool or for the matter of fact anybody would have taken that path......gutsy producer who has taken this bold step to make it into a film, and he got it right...

 

[trevanian]

The book was blah, the movie was the best SF piece of the century (well, top 2 anyway.)
Cuaron is a genius based on his visual treatment of POTTER 3 and this pic, can't wait to see more of his stuff (wish he was doing a Bond, if Clive Owen was playing 007 it would have already happened with Curaon and I'd be over the moon instead of in a brood till 2015 due to the horrid miscasting of buttugly Craig.)

 

[clint g]

Wow, I must have been one of the few who really hated the movie lol. I guess i should give it another watch and see if I still feel the same way

 

[Reverend]

Loved the CoM movie, avoided the book after reading several negative reviews.

It's a bit of a myth that with all adaptions, the movie must be inferior than the book it's based on, but it's just not that universal. Someone already mentioned Jurassic Park 2. From what I gather the only thing the book has in common with the film is the title. The same applied to the Borne films; though the books themselves are still good, the films were IMO better (so far.)
I haven't read it myself but I heard that Forest Gump is a totally different animal on the page than on the screen. In a similar vein as Contact, Asimov's 'Bicentennial Man' was just a short story, while the film, while containing some of the same material was a much more compelling, human story.

Not such a good example since I gather I'm one of a very few people that actually liked the film version, but I heard the book that Costner's 'The Postman' was nothing like the movie.

 

[Emher]

^The Forrest Gump book is cynical and disjointed where the movie is heartwarming, a sprawling story and genuinely funny at times.

Contact I'd argue that they yes they are different, but the movie is still about as good a job you could do in adapting the book. And each works great on their own.

 

[bigdaddy]

The book was blah, the movie was the best SF piece of the century (well, top 2 anyway.)
Cuaron is a genius based on his visual treatment of POTTER 3 and this pic, can't wait to see more of his stuff (wish he was doing a Bond, if Clive Owen was playing 007 it would have already happened with Curaon and I'd be over the moon instead of in a brood till 2015 due to the horrid miscasting of buttugly Craig.)

1. What is your favorite sci-fi movie if CoM is 2?

2. Clive Owen is a horrible actor and would have made a horrible James Bond. That said Craig is butt ugly.

Wow, I must have been one of the few who really hated the movie lol. I guess i should give it another watch and see if I still feel the same way

it's OK, we already knew you didn't have taste, you are a Yankee fan after all.

 

[clint g]

it's OK, we already knew you didn't have taste, you are a Yankee fan after all.

On the contrary, it means I only settle for world champion material