We tend to trust an author ’s legal opinion when it comes to the caliber of an adaptation of his or her books . But sometimes , perhaps authors do n’t always jazz best , as an essay in AwardsCircuit point out .
Lois Lowry extravagantly praised the new movie of The Giver , despite the huge liberties it takes with her book — even saying that she thought it improved on her bookin some areas . Which direct Joseph Braverman to enquire if perhaps writer are n’t always the well judges of film and television system adaptations . He writes :
Just conceive for a consequence think about all the times certain authors had been wrong about a film adaptation of their works : Stephen King ( The Shining ) , Frank Herbert ( Dune ) , Anthony Burgess ( A Clockwork Orange ) , Anne Rice ( Interview with a Vampire ) , Bret Easton Ellis ( American Psycho ) , Alan Moore ( 5 for Vendetta ) , and the tilt can go on and on . How the heck did Stephen King not at least honour Stanley Kubrick ’s artistic artistry , which factor out heavily into the psychosis of the characters themselves ? Or how on earth could Frank Herbert be satisfied with David Lynch ’s Dune , a film so visually fantastical that the mountain of it likely sent viewers fleeing the cineplex well before the confounding game could ? In other words , fanboys and fangirls of the Milky Way galaxy , author approval really should have no presence on whether you see or avoid a movie .
What do you think — should we always trust an author ’s seal of approval of favorable reception ( or sentence ) when a pic or telly show adapt her / his Christian Bible ? Or are generator sometimes not the best judge of how their material is handled ? [ Awards Circuit ]
BooksDuneMoviesShiningStephen King
Daily Newsletter
Get the best tech , skill , and culture news in your inbox day by day .
News from the future , delivered to your present .
You May Also Like
