When adapting books and comics into movies, certain changes must be made to accommodate the new medium. While fans sometimes bristle at plotlines and characters being alteredâor even cut out completelyâthereâs no way for adaptations to be entirely faithful. However, some film adaptations seem to entirely miss the point of their source material. That isnât to say that theyâre necessarily bad movies, just bad adaptations. Here are 10 such examples.
Related: The Ten Best Comic Book to Movie Adaptations
10 The Secret Life of Walter Mitty (2013)
The Secret Life of Walter Mitty: Extended Trailer â 6 Minutes [HD]
The Secret Life of Walter Mitty (2013) follows the daydreaming titular character (played by Ben Stiller) as he goes on an adventurous journey around the world that breaks him out of his mundane life. Itâs whimsical and aspirationalâwhich is completely at odds with the tone and plot of James Thurberâs 1939 short story.
The original story takes place over just one day, with Walter daydreaming to escape his boredom while on a shopping trip with his wife. Not only does he never actually break out of the dullness of the everyday, but his final daydream is of his own death via firing squad. Rather than channeling Thurberâs satirical tone, Stiller plays it mostly earnest, spinning what feels like a feature-length âJust Do Itâ ad for restless middle-aged auds,â explains film critic Peter Debruge.
The 1947 film adaptation starring Danny Kaye is also far more feel-good than Thurberâs short story, with Walter getting to actually live an exciting life throughout the movie.[1]
9 Blade Runner (1982)
Blade Runner, Lost in Adaptation ~ The Dom
Ridley Scottâs Blade Runner (1982) is only a loose adaptation of Philip K. Dickâs Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (1968). In the film, the bio-engineered replicants are near-indistinguishable from human beings, and the audience is led to feel sympathy for them. In the book, the replicants (called andysâshort for androids) are cast as villains and are totally lacking in empathy, making them easy to distinguish from humans.
While Scottâs version of the story is about the lines between human and replicant becoming blurred, in Dickâs book, the focus is on humanity and the various ways in which people are trying to cope with their miserable realityâfrom a religion called Mercerism to looking after robotic animals because real animals are now rare and expensive commodities.[2]
8 Breakfast at Tiffanyâs (1961)
How Breakfast at Tiffanyâs Turned into a Totally Different Movie | Adapting a Classic
Breakfast at Tiffanyâs (1961)âstarring Audrey Hepburn and George Peppardâis a classic romantic comedy, but Truman Capoteâs 1958 novella of the same name is distinctly lacking in romance between the two lead characters.
While both the book and the movie share themes of independence, connection, and authenticity, the addition of a romantic element completely changes the tone. In the novella, not only do Holly Golightly and the unnamed narratorânamed Paul Varjak in the filmânot engage in a romantic relationship, but itâs heavily implied that the narrator is gay. According to Holly, âIf a man doesnât like baseball, then he must like horses, and if he doesnât like either of them, well, Iâm in trouble anyway: he donât like girls.â The narrator significantly has no interest in either baseball or horses.
The novella also ends on a rather somber note, with the complicated and enigmatic Holly disappearing from the narratorâs life. But the movie wraps up with a happily-ever-after kiss between Holly and Paul.[3]
7 Less Than Zero (1987)
Less Than Zero | Gen Xâs 1987 Gem in its Stunning Excess
When Bret Easton Ellis saw the 1987 movie adaptation of his book Less Than Zero (1985), he recalls thinking, âThatâs interesting. They didnât use a single scene from the book in the movie. How did they do that?â Although he said the film was âvisually ravishing,â he was disappointed that it âcompletely inverted the meaning of the book.â
In the book, when college student Clay returns to LA for winter break, he witnesses many horrific thingsâfrom a snuff film to a sex slaveâand becomes disillusioned and detached from the drug and party lifestyle. Bleakness is the point, but the film offers a sanitized version of the story. âThere has been a tremendous conservative change in young audiences since the book was written in 1984,â Scott Rudin, then vice president of production at 20th Century Fox, said by way of justification.
In the film, not only does Clay (Andrew McCarthy) not indulge in drugs like his friends, but Julianâs (Robert Downey Jr.) addiction destroys him, and Blair (Jami Gertz) flushes her cocaine down the sink. The book is far darker, with the characters never repenting their terrible choices and not suffering any serious consequences for their destructive and often illegal behavior.
In 2010, Ellis published a sequel to the story, Imperial Bedrooms, which included commentary on the film. âThe movie was begging for our sympathy, whereas the book didnât give a sh*t,â Clay says.[4]
6 The Scarlet Letter (1995)
The Worst Literary Adaptation Ever made | Scarlet letter (Demi Moore)
Set during the 17th century in the Puritan Massachusetts Bay Colony, Nathaniel Hawthorneâs The Scarlet Letter (1850) follows the persecution of adulterer Hester Prynne. But while the book explores themes of sin, shame, and hypocrisy, the 1995 film adaptationâstarring Demi Moore as Hester and Gary Oldman as Minister Arthur Dimmesdaleâinstead turns the story into a sultry tale of forbidden romance.
The book is focused on the disastrous fallout of Hester and Arthurâs relationship rather than on the relationship itself. In contrast, the film, in the words of film critic Roger Ebert, âimagines all of the events leading up to the adultery, photographed in the style of those Playboyâs Fantasies videos.â (LINK 9) The film essentially makes a case for sexual freedom rather than condemning pious cruelty.
Director Roland Joffe said that âthe book is set in a time when the seeds were sown for the bigotry, sexism, and lack of tolerance we still battle today⌠yet it is often looked at merely as a tale of 19th-century moralizing, a treatise against adultery.â (LINK 10) But aside from Joffe getting the century wrong, the book is not a treatise against adultery but against hypocrisyâsomething that the film completely misses.[5]
5 V for Vendetta (2005)
V FOR VENDETTA (Movie): Is It Deep or Dumb?
Comic book writer Alan Moore is known for usually not wanting to be associated with the Hollywood adaptations of his stories. Just before V for Vendetta (2005) hit the big screen, he told the New York Times, âIâve read the screenplay. Itâs rubbish.â While many people donât agree with Moore that V for Vendetta is rubbish, it does undeniably go against the message of the comic book, which was published between 1982 and 1989.
Mooreâs story is a morally complicated narrative about fascism versus anarchism, with V being a violent vigilante. The film dilutes this central conflict to instead create a clear-cut narrative about authoritarianism versus liberty, with V (played by Hugo Weaving) being a heroic character fighting for freedom. âThose words, âfascismâ and âanarchy,â occur nowhere in the film,â Moore explains. âItâs been turned into a Bush-era parable by people too timid to set a political satire in their own country.â[6]
4 Watchmen (2009)
The Problem(s) With Zack Snyderâs Watchmen
Another Alan Moore comic book adaptation that missed the mark is Zack Snyderâs Watchmen (2009). The story was originally published between 1986 and 1987, and when examining the plot beats alone, the film is a fairly accurate adaptation; however, it critically misunderstands the comicâs message.
While the comic book offers a scathing critique of violence, the movie glamorizes the violent action scenes. âItâs not Fantastic Four, itâs got to be hard R, itâs got to challenge everyoneâs ideas,â Snyder said. âWhen they say, âYou should be less sexy and less violent,â I say, âBut thatâs Watchmen.ââ While itâs fair for the movie to include violence, shooting such scenes to look cool undermines one of the central messages of the comic. Snyderâs superheroes may be morally grey, but theyâre still often presented as heroes. In contrast, the comic book characters are deeply dysfunctional regular people who should never have donned spandex.[7]
3 Death Wish (1974)
Everything Wrong With Death Wish (1974)
Brian Garfieldâs novel Death Wish (1972) sees Paul Benjamin become an unhinged vigilante after his wife is murdered and his daughter is left in a vegetative state. But the 1974 film adaptationâdirected by Michael Winner and starring Charles Bronsonâindulges in a revenge fantasy. While the book ultimately denounces Paul as a villain, the film embraces him as a hero.
âThe point of the novel Death Wish is that vigilantism is an attractive fantasy, but it only makes things worse in reality,â Garfield explained in a 2008 interview. âBy the end of the novel, the character (Paul) is gunning down unarmed teenagers because he doesnât like their looks. The story is about an ordinary guy who descends into madness.â[8]
2 I Am Legend (2007)
I Am Legend: WTF Happened To This Adaptation?
Richard Mathesonâs I Am Legend (1954) ends (spoiler alert) with Robert Neville realizing that his mass killing of vampires has led to him becoming a legendary monster to them, hence the bookâs title and last line. Unfortunately, in the 2007 film adaptation, Will Smithâs version of Neville does not come to this realization. Instead, heâs described as a legend because he creates a cure and sacrifices himself to ensure that humanity will be saved.
The Omega Man (1971) similarly ends with humanity being saved by a cure, but itâs hardly an accurate adaptation throughout, with Matheson saying it âwas so removed from my book that it didnât even bother me!â While the 2007 adaptation is more faithful to the source material, the changes made still led to Matheson saying, âI donât know why they keep buying my books. They might as well have written something entirely new.â
The 2007 adaptation did originally have an ending that was closer to the book, with Neville recognizing his cruelty towards the vampires (called Darkseekers in the film). Director Francis Lawrence preferred this darker ending where âthe creatures youâve been saying are the bad ones the whole time you learn actually have humanity and arenât the bad onesâthe heroâs the bad one.â However, this ending was tested twice, and audiences rejected it both times, which is why they shot a happier ending with Neville as the hero.[9]
1 I, Robot (2004)
The 2004 film adaptation of Isaac Asimovâs I, Robot (1950)âwhich stars Will Smithâhas barely any similarities to the short story collection. The film wasnât even originally conceived as an adaptation and came from an original script by Jeff Vintar. Called Hardwired, the story follows a human detective as he tries to solve a locked-room murder mystery where all of the suspects are robots.
After being trapped in development hell, 20th Century Fox saved the film, but they asked Vintar to make some I, Robot additions. âThe feeling was, of course, that it would be very difficult to get a movie out of the I, Robot stories,â Vintar admitted. âTheyâre a very loose collection of stories.â In the end, only a few elements from the fix-up novel were added, including naming a character Susan Calvin and mentioning Asimovâs âThree Laws of Robotics.â
However, aside from the plot being entirely different, the movie also takes an opposite ideological stance. In 1978, Asimov explained that with I, Robot, he had âself-consciously combated the âFrankenstein complexâ and made of the robots the servants, friends, and allies of humanity.â By contrast, in the movie, the robots stage a murderous uprising against humanity.[10]
fact checked by
Darci Heikkinen