Page to Screen: Book to movie / series adaptation discussions - Page 5

Originally posted by: Sevenstreaks

I used to read AUs too

@Bold : That's sufficient. Because we already got connected to names and faces ( older or younger version d vision is still d same)

A while ago I would have said AUs were an absolute no-no for me. The only FFs I would ever read were fix-it ones that gave closure to everything that went wrong in canon, or wrote about a ship that never came to fruition in canon but one that I actively shipped. (the amount of House M.D. Fanfics I've read! )

But after Bridgerton Season 2 and the number of modern Kanthony AUs that were written that I ended up reading after stubbornly refusing to for a long time, I have changed my mind. The way they stayed so faithful to the core of the characters but just replaced the Regency era with modern keeping the characters' struggles the same absolutely hooked me in. I was all in. So yeah, I agree with what some of you have said - if they stay truthful to the characterization I'd be up for AUs

Originally posted by: LizzieBennet

Thanks, everyone for sharing your thoughts but now that you've done I want to put this to you all..

When you read, do you imagine a character to look a certain way based off of the author's descriptions? Going one step further, do you fancast a character in your head when you read? And when the screen adaptation comes out, did you ever find that your fancast (or mental picture) of that character was so perfectly embodied by the actor in question that you cannot now imagine that character as looking like anyone else? Or the other way round - the actor was nothing like you imagined but you were still blown away by their portrayal and now they have replaced your original fancast in your head?

Do tell us your own personal Top 3, or Top 5 or even Top 10 actors who lived and breathed their characters so much that they became that character.

Nah i don't imagine any actor when I'm reading a book at all

Top 3 ;

Richard and Michael as Dumbledore (yeah i liked both the actors)

Helena as Bellatrix

Maggie Smith as Prof.Mcgonagall

Originally posted by: LizzieBennet

A while ago I would have said AUs were an absolute no-no for me. The only FFs I would ever read were fix-it ones that gave closure to everything that went wrong in canon, or wrote about a ship that never came to fruition in canon but one that I actively shipped. (the amount of House M.D. Fanfics I've read! )

But after Bridgerton Season 2 and the number of modern Kanthony AUs that were written that I ended up reading after stubbornly refusing to for a long time, I have changed my mind. The way they stayed so faithful to the core of the characters but just replaced the Regency era with modern keeping the characters' struggles the same absolutely hooked me in. I was all in. So yeah, I agree with what some of you have said - if they stay truthful to the characterization I'd be up for AUs

Oh my god, the amount Polin fanfics I read waiting for Season 3 (I have nearly 100 fics bookmarked on AO3, and they're not even the couple with the most bookmarked fics.) But yeah, I agree, I don't think I've read a Bridgerton AU that I've disliked (yet). A lot of the modern AUs and even post-s2/'what I want for s3' fics were just the same story beats from the book (and the first two seasons for modern AUs) told through a different writer's perspective (if that makes sense).

Originally posted by: Pete15rogmourey

Nah i don't imagine any actor when I'm reading a book at all

Top 3 ;

Richard and Michael as Dumbledore (yeah i liked both the actors)

Helena as Bellatrix

Maggie Smith as Prof.Mcgonagall

Maggie Smith is an absolute legend. I loved how she portrayed McGonagall, she absolutely slayed. She made the character even more badass than the books for me. Same with Alan Rickman and Snape. He elevated that character to so so much more than he was in the books.

Originally posted by: LizzieBennet

Maggie Smith is an absolute legend. I loved how she portrayed McGonagall, she absolutely slayed. She made the character even more badass than the books for me. Same with Alan Rickman and Snape. He elevated that character to so so much more than he was in the books.

Yeah Alan made Snape a likeable character. He was a better version of book Snape

RIP Alan Rickman

Originally posted by: LizzieBennet

I couldn't get into RDJ's Sherlock either. Hearing him spout an English accent did not feel authentic at all! Whereas Jude Law as Watson I could get behind.

That said, Benedict Cumberbatch and Martin Freeman shared great chemistry as Sherlock and Watson. We tend to forget how important Watson is to canon. The earlier Shelock series with Jeremy Brett who simply stunned as Sherlock had someone non-descript as Watson. Ditto for the Poirot series. Hastings there was so unmemorable and he's so so important in canon and we absolutely needed actors with good chemistry to play the Poirot-Hastings banter effectively on screen. I missed that in the series! But Kenneth Branagh as Poirot is still an absolute No for me

More than the accent, I just can't see him as Sherlock. Sherlock from the books immediately strikes one as tall, thin and with an intelligible look... RDJ doesn't fit that description... Benedict Cumberbatch does. I agree about Watson... both Jude Law and Martin Freeman suit the role.

I haven't read Poirot and only saw one of the movies (Murder on Orient Express). I liked the movie for it's plot (credit for which of course goes to the original writer Agatha Christie) but never having read the books, I can't really compare.

Originally posted by: ssttuuttii

Everyone is welcome in the discussion of course, as long as the TM doesn't mind us going slightly of-topic .

@Blue Now that you say it, I'm understanding the motivations of writers better.

As a reader, I usually start out by reading track-related stories. Sometimes, I may get intrigued by an AU plot which will make me give it a try... but like you said, I want the characterizations to be as close to original as possible even if the setting is changed. The only times I've read completely AU FFs (with changed characterizations) is when I was already familiar with the author's writing beforehand. Then I just go into it with the perspective of reading an original work and it ceases to be a fanfic for me.

@bold This! Until you said this, it didn't occur to me how much the writing style mattered to me. Like I'll read one's Drarry × The Secret History crossover if the prose is good. In fact I'd happily read an FF that's about a show I've never watched if I know the writing is good. Incidentally, that is how I found the period drama Victoria. One of my favourite FF writers had bookmarked a Lord M/Victoria fic.

Originally posted by: LizzieBennet

Thanks for your response, aryapdane!

I read Time to Kill a long time ago and was pretty sure I watched the movie too, but from your description perhaps not? I must watch it then.

OMFG!!! I did not think I'd come across anyone who'd read Wodehouse on here let alone have watched Jeeves & Wooster the series! And I absolutely agree! I have watched other Wodehouse adaptations (some of the Blandings Castle ones) and they were duds for me but this one shone! And it's mostly because of how true they stayed to the characters and the writing and 99.99% because of the excellent casting of Hugh Laurie and Stephen Fry as Wooster and Jeeves. They lived and breathed those characters!

I absolutely loved the LotR movies. They're what got me into the book, & they're probably one of the very rare instances where I enjoy the screen adaptation more than the book. That said, I agree with you on the Hobbit and Rings of Power. Complete bore fests & there was absolutely no call to stretch The Hobbit in 3 longass movies!

Good Omens was wonderful though I have not read the books. I could not stand the adaptation of THHGTTG, so was wondering if they'd do this one right but they did. Which makes me wanna watch Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency, also because I don't remember the book much at all.

I very recently read Book Lovers so I'm curious too. Have they cast for it already? Is it under production? I wonder how that book will translate into a movie because so much of it is character work. But I'd watch it for sure.

Hello, fellow Wodehouse fan! I can't say how delighted I am to find you lol. It's criminal how people these days don't read Wodehouse. The Blandings series is my favourite Wodehouse series. But man, the tv adaptation just didn't cut it. You're absolutely right about Hugh Laurie and Stephen Fry. I really can't imagine anyone other than them playing Bertie and Jeeves.

Good Omens is really so fantastic that I love the show more than the books. Thank God it's Neil Gaiman who is writing the show. I don't think it would've been half as good in anyone else's hands.

I couldn't stand the adaptation either. Hitchhiker's guide is again one of those books that seem unadaptable.

I don't think they have casted the actors for Book Lovers yet but I think if we get two actors with great chemistry, we should be fine.

What do you think about the Colleen Hoover adaptation that's coming out? Personally I hate Colleen Hoover's writing. But maybe the movie will be salvageable??

Originally posted by: LizzieBennet

Thanks, everyone for sharing your thoughts but now that you've done I want to put this to you all..

When you read, do you imagine a character to look a certain way based off of the author's descriptions? Going one step further, do you fancast a character in your head when you read? And when the screen adaptation comes out, did you ever find that your fancast (or mental picture) of that character was so perfectly embodied by the actor in question that you cannot now imagine that character as looking like anyone else? Or the other way round - the actor was nothing like you imagined but you were still blown away by their portrayal and now they have replaced your original fancast in your head?

Do tell us your own personal Top 3, or Top 5 or even Top 10 actors who lived and breathed their characters so much that they became that character.

In the same boat as Pete15rogmourey... I don't imagine actors while reading. This applies to books that I've read after watching the movies as well, although sometimes places/things (eg. Hogwarts from movies) do end up sticking in my mind.

I agree with the Harry Potter actors mentioned by you both although I liked Richard Harris as Dumbledore more than Michael Gambon. Helena Bonham Carter and Maggie Smith were legendary in their roles. As for Alan Rickman, my only issue with him is that he made Snape into a fan-fav character . He is not that likable in the books but Alan makes it hard to hate him in the movies . Same goes with Tom Felton as Draco...

I like the Weasleys casting... especially the twins. Robbie Coltrane as Hagrid, Evanna Lynch as Luna... Harry Potter is one of those rare movie series where they got most of the casting choices absolutely right.

But like I mentioned in an earlier comment, my top actor portrayal (for being truest to the book) is Imelda Staunton as Dolores Umbridge. The characterization from the book is so thoroughly echoed in her performance... that sweet smile while doling out inhuman punishments, that slight hardening of eyes even while maintaining a polite tone of voice... she brings it all to life in really subtle ways. The fact that she had a hand in designing her costumes for the movie gives her further brownie points for going so deep into the character .

Between Helena, Alan, Tom and Imelda.... HP somehow has better actors cast for the villains than the heroes (not hating on the main cast, I like them too... just saying that these actors managed to outclass them despite being in a negative role).

Since I was the one to bring The Chronicles of Narnia to this discussion, I'll add some good casting choices from there as well... the Pevensie siblings and Tilda Swinton as the White Witch were marvelous too.