Films Based on Books I've Read

I had totally forgot about this movie. I had meant to watch it for ages, but never got around to it. I liked the book alot more than the movie, but the two are pretty similiar. I really didn't like the onscreen narration- forth person or whatever its called. Other than that it was really pretty good.

mmm.. its okay.

Really a great movie. Kate Winslet and Leonardo DeCaprio gave stunning performances. Its pretty much a page-to-page adaption of Richard Yates book- which really doesn't happen all that often. I do not remember anything from the book that wasn't in the movie, nor was anything added (that i remember) The only thing i didn't really like about it is the ending. Nothing is really resolved, and i'm not totally sure what you are suppose to fell as an audience after fiinishing it. Its an intense, emotional film up to that point, but then it kind of dies. Still, its lush, well scripted, and engaging to watch, even if it is kind of depressing... =\

Its a typical disney adaptation of an amazing trippy book. But the film is still pretty fantastic, even if it is a bit on the sappy side.

Great movie.

Great movie.

Great movie.

one of the better potter movies. Doesn't always flow the best though. It seems pretty chopped in a lot a parts.

mmm.... its okay, but its my least favorite Harry Potter book.

One of the best. I haven't watched it for ages though.

Hands down the best Potter movie. Its completely differant from the other ones. Alfonso Cuaron gave the Hogwarts a much darker and interesting setting.

The screen darkens and we hear a voice-over of Bellatrix?s macabre and triumph chant: 'I killed Sirius Black! You gonna get me?' This is immediately followed by several shots of a bloodied Harry and stressed looking Dumbledore being assaulted by the press. So much is communicated in this brief scene, and it ultimately underlines one of the main storylines/themes of the film. That being the significant bond between Harry and Dumbledore. A bond the goes far deeper than headmaster and pupil, or than that they share a distrust of the Ministry of Magic, and even more personal than being fellow radicals fighting against Voldemort. It also shows that Harry is still struggling with his godfather's murder, and that he fosters a burning rage towards Bellatrix, who gleefully murdered her cousin. None of the other Harry Potter films- other than The Goblet of Fire- have had any kind of a proper opening. They have all jumped right into the story. I still it would have had a full opening credits, but overall that really doesn't matter.
The scene immediately following shows the Death Eaters assaulting the Muggle (Human) world. Once again this makes an important point right off the bat: Nothing and No one is safe anymore. The Death Eater's first swoop over London is almost sickening. After that, though, its kind of disappointing. Almost all of the footage from this was used in the trailers, and it was played up to be a lot more intense and exciting there. It almost felt like, while watching it, that there was something missing or that part of it had been cut. Which is possible with its PG rating and all?

Overall, I would say that The Half-Blood Prince rivals Alfonso Cuaron's Prisoner of Azkaban or maybe even surpasses it. The two films are actually pretty similar; both in look and feel, and also in the style of the adaptation. Hogwarts, Diagon Alley, The Burrow, and other locations are all beautiful, stylish, and artistic. Even though endless material was cut from the book, the film still has the same mood, tone, and emotional intensity the book carried. One of the most moving and memorable scenes in the movie was a new one. After Ron ends up with Lavender, Hermione and Harry share a moment contemplating the pain of impossible love. One of the other new scenes, in which The Burrow is destroyed, is also a really strong sequence. I really do not mind if things are cut or added in an adaptation as long as the film itself is stronger because of it. The Order of the Phoenix was not. It took the absolute necessities from the book and morphed them into an irritating mess. Personally, I would think that Harry Potter fans would be kind of happy to see something new and different onscreen now that the books are completed, but who knows?.

I'm not totally sure how The Half-Blood Prince garnered a PG rating. There is flat out more blood and destruction than I have seen in any other PG movie. The storyline itself is very dark and fairly mature. I would be more likely to let a small child watch Little Miss Sunshine or The Darjeeling Limited, both of which were R rated, than I would this film. A lot of the doom and gloom from the book was cut out for the film, but Dumbledore's murder, Draco's attempted suicide, Katie's accident, various attacks on Muggles, and the destruction of various establishments is shown onscreen. Even the memory sequences are fairly disturbing. There are quite a few clever and humorous scenes, but they are not anything a Six year-old is going to enjoy. There are a couple parts that feel kind of incomplete, as if something is missing or was edited out. So, I wonder if The Half-Blood Prince was intentionally edited down to a PG. And if it was, I really wonder why?

Most of this is just my nitpicky thoughts and opinions and that is really it. The film really is probably the most entertaining and well made Harry Potter film yet. There really was not a single thing that bothered me while watching it. Most of this occurred to me after the fact. The ending is kind of abrupt, but the book was kind of that way too. A couple parts allude to elements from The Deathly Hallows, which was a stroke of genius on director, Daniel Yates, part. The Half-Blood Prince is really good and enjoyable and I can't wait for the dvd.

I really liked it a lot. Its Destiny.... I really do not know how you could not like it. It covers so many topics and brings so many emotions out, but you never get the feeling that your being manipulated in any way. I really loved the look and feel of it too. The cinematography was fasinating and intoxicating too, but i didn't really notice it at the time, its such and enthralling movie you really do not notice everything because you are so wrapped up in the story. Very, very good.

Hands down one of the best movies ever. I watch it from start to finish last night for the first time in months, and it is hands down the closest any film has came to being flawless. It stunning from the opening prolog. All of the script is great, and acting is remarkable, and its visually stunning. I liked it alot more than the Matrix trilogy. Its almost more of a drama than a science firction/fantasy film. Its clever and dark, and all around just stunning.

'Who Watches the Watchmen?' I've seen and heard this in so many places since this movie has came out its practically became a cliché. Still, it's a tantalizing and illusive idea. Who watches those who do the same for us? What keeps them from becoming tyrannical and corrupt? Who watches the Watchmen?

Alan Moore (V for Vendetta, From Hell) created something revolutionary and provocative with the original Watchmen graphic novel. He created something that defied the standards of a typical 'comic' Watchmen foremost contains more violence, sex, and language than any of its peers. Also, Watchmen is not fueled by an action-packed plot. Rather, its driven by its characters themselves; their problems, weaknesses, and lives.

Personally, I wasn't that shocked by anything in Watchmen, and kind of wondered why so many people had made such a fuss about the 'content'. This is looking at it as a adult film though- which Watchmen certainly is, both in story and content. If your going to compare to The Fantastic Four then yes, it's a shocker. I don't think the Watchmen film will really be remembered that long. Simply because The Dark Knight swept in last year, and in many ways the two movies are similar. Even though Watchmen has been around for twenty plus years, I think moviegoers will remember The Dark Knight as being the first compelling and mature superhero film.

I was honestly surprised at how stylish and artistic Watchmen is. I really did not expect that at all. Its really wonderful visually. I also loved that it had a bit of a prolog and then a proper opening titles sequence. The music was great, and not what you would associate with this type of film. My only complaint with the entire thing is that its about a half-hour too long. It seemed like it was never going to end. I thought the book drug a bit too though, towards the ending. So, its not entirely the film's fault. Still, it's a wonderful film and definitely one of the years best- at least so far.

Everything is Illuminated could have been a Tim Burton movie. That?s one of the best compliments I can think of for it. It is severely fantastic, whimsical, colorful, and at the same time very dark and gripping. I loved pretty much everything about it. Elijah Wood really gave a delicate performance that I wouldn?t have expected from him. Also, as far as holocaust/World War II movies go, this one shows things in an entirely different light than I?ve seen in any other. Even though it treats the subject in a really light way, its still a very moving and sad story. Unlike other holocaust movies like say The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, which really was a good movie, Everything is Illuminated is a movie that can be watched multiple times. It doesn?t just exist to show how horrible the event was, or to bring out emotions; and really, its all the stronger for it.

This honestly one of my favorite romances. Its absolutely brilliant. The movie is really close to the book, which was really good too. The acting is great. I really liked Saroise Ronan-this was the first thing i had seen her in. Really just a great film all around.

?And so the lion fell in love with the lamb.? In a nutshell this is the plot of Twilight. Human ?lamb? Bella falls madly in love with the vampire Edward, who despite all his denunciations is by nature a predatory ?lion?. I love the Twilight books, but this movie really isn?t all that notable. There are few really well done sequences; the ?reveal? seen in which Edward reveals his vampire self and the closing prom scene being among them. The rest, however, is very mediocre. Kristin Stewart and Robert Pattinson really do look and work well together, but they are not at all how I pictured Bella and Edward looking. Stewart is too glamorous and Pattinson too ordinary to really look their roles. I understand though that both roles, especially Edward?s, really can?t be played accurately by anyone. The movies biggest weakness was its script, a lot of the dialog was strained or unnecessary. One of the major strong points is the lush feel to the locations and the beautiful scenery. Another thing I really liked about the Twilight movie was the way the director took a very large scale epic romance and made it fairly small and personal. It was a very different approach, but it worked well. Overall, nothing amazing for sure, but there also wasn?t anything terrible to Twilight.

This is going to be very good. I thought it was coming out this December, but i guess not. The book is amazing!

many mixed feelings here, but its really pretty good.

Quantum of Solace is probably my favorite action type movie. The only other one that would come close would be The Bourne Identity. It?s gripping and thrilling and very stylish and artistic at the same time. It was the first James Bond movie I?ve ever seen, and its really wasn?t what I was expecting. I guess I thought it would be just like Get Smart only it would be taking itself seriously. Daniel Craig and Otra ??? were perfect for their roles. The guy from The Diving Bell and the Butterfly just didn?t work though. He still looks like he is suffering some side effects from the locked-in-syndrome. Really, my only complaint is that there was just a lot of corny one liners stuck in at random places. They really detracted from the rest of the movie. Even so, I liked it a lot and will definitely watch it again sometime.

One of my favorite Tim Burton movies. Its amazing.

Really good. Kind of reminded me of Sleepy Hollow or Sweeney Todd, only its a bit more historical looking and not at stylish. Plus Alan Moore (Watchmen, V for Vendetta) wrote it so you have to love it. It wasn't as graphic as i was expecting either....

I was actually a bit disappointed with Coraline. All through the marketing it had been compared to The Nightmare Before Christmas, and it isn?t on par with it at all. Tim Burton?s poem is basically a cute romance between two optimistic dreamers and then its surrounded by dark imagery. Coraline-the book- really isn?t like that at all. There is a nasty, gritty edge to the story itself, and then that story is driven by quirky characters. Neil Gaiman?s novella is kind of the modern equivalent of Alice in Wonderland. I wasn?t that impressed with the movie while I was actually watching it, but looking back on it I really like it a lot-if that makes any sense at all.

The adaptation takes, adds, and musses stuff about quite a bit. Selick really did a good job of it though; the film flows well, and still carries the same tone that Coraline had. The only things I really didn?t like was the character Wyborn and then also the finally conclusion/ending. The problem with both of these is just that they give a typical mainstream edge to what is otherwise a dark melodrama that defies what is typical for a kid?s movie; and personally, Wyborn really annoyed me.

There is lots of extremely trippy and delightful imagery in the film. We see bats with the bodies of dogs, dogs with halos and wings, flowers that are alive, and so much more. The animation itself is really extreme and flamboyant, and I liked it a lot. The music was impressive too, I kind of wish there had been more actual songs. There was a lot of choralish stuff in the beginning, and then hardly any in the later film.

Really, it?s a good , charming movie. Its really pretty harmless too, I was hoping it would be creepy, but it really wasn?t at all. I probably will not watch this over and over like I have The Nightmare Before Christmas and Corpse Bride. Frankly, it just is not as good as either of them. Still, it is visionary and fairly ingenious, and I liked it a lot.

Not as good as corpsebride or the nightmare beofre christmas but kind of the same style

Pretty lame, obvious, and hokey, but I still kind of liked it.... no idea why....

Such an amazing movie. Fasinating and captivating. Lots of great acting, esp Amy Adam's performance as Sister James. It was just amazing.

I absolutely loved this movie. Its artistic and brilliant and really just stunning all around. I really liked Ralph Fiennes it seems like he has gotten overshadowed a bit. But Kate Winslet really did deserve ever award she won. I really liked the book, and the movie is really similar.

?I was born under curious circumstances?? The Curious Case of Benjamin Button was flat out amazing. The story, script, acting, score, and production are all extraordinary. There?s a lot of stuff in it that I would usually find kind of corny- like the soldier giving Benjamin all of his pay, or the ending: ?some swim, some are artists? and some dance?- but here it is all very remarkable. The script is very poetic, and there is almost more narration than actual dialog. The story itself is really pretty sad and melancholy from start to finish. It is not dark or pessimistic- if anything it is very optimistic- but its very tragic from the word GO. Within the first ten minutes we see Benjamin?s lifelong friend Daisy on her deathbed having Benjamin?s journal read aloud by her daughter. His journal opens with the story of a clockmaker whose son died during the World War II. He makes a clock that runs backwards with the hope that time may rewind and his son may come home. After this he is never seen by anyone again. Even the general color palette of the movie sticks with dark greens and drab browns and tans. There are just as many joyous moments though even though they play out the same way as the tragedies. I heard countless people complain that nobody in the movie really cared that Benjamin was aging backwards, but why would they? It doesn?t really effect anyone at all other than Daisy, her daughter, and Benjamin himself, and it obviously concerns them a lot. They cannot live a normal life and they have to make many sacrifices, but they are willing to make them in order to stay together. Benjamin Button is almost three hours long, but it does not really seem like it is that long when you are watching it. Its really pretty structured, almost too much. There is hardly any ?plot? at all. Its just a journey and celebration of Benjamin?s life; and the effect he had on others, as well as how they changed him. We see so many people settling for an ordinary life because they feel that they are too old, or too young, for anything else. Benjamin shows us just how irrelevant age is, and that no life truly is ordinary nor are any of those who live them. Deffinatly one of the best movies ever.

Kate DiCallimo?s The Tale of Despereaux is probably the greatest children?s book of all time, and the movie, while not extraordinary the movie really carries the same spirit. It?s a strong tale of dreaming and longing. We see a mouse that longs to be brave and falls in love with a princess. We see a princess who longs for happiness and to be loved. We also see a poor deaf farm girl who dreams of being royalty, and a rat who longs for forgiveness, but is driven to revenge. These characters are some of the most personal and touching animated characters I have seen since Ariel dreamed of walking on land and Jack Skellington felt a longing inside of his bones for a life that was more than he knew. The book is also filled with extraordinary narration, some of which was worked into the movie, but most of it was not. This would be my biggest complaint with the movie. There were only two other things that really bothered me about the movie. One was the humor that was randomly thrown in throughout the movie. None of it was particularly funny, and it really doesn?t work with the tone of the story, nor was any of it in the book. The second thing was the plot changes. It didn?t bother me that they changed the plot some; it?s just that what they added wasn?t nearly as good as what was originally there. One of the highlights of the film for me was that Emma Watson (Hermione in Harry Potter) did the voice of the Princess. She did an extraordinary job that really didn?t show any resemblance to Hermione. It will be interesting to see what other roles she?ll pursue once the Potter movies are finished. A lot of the other voicing was kind of flamboyant, not bad; they?re just kind of overly theatrical. I think anyone, however, who is not familiar with Kate DiCamillo?s book would not notice these things and enjoy the movie more than I did. Overall, it certainly had many fine points and was entertaining to watch, but The Tale of Despereaux was just too mediocre in too many ways to be truly magnificent.

AMAZING! One of the most fasinating, intoxicating, and ultimately inspiring movie i have ever seen. I was kind of spetical as to how there could be a two hour movie about a guy with locked-in-syndrome but its really rather fasinating. The cinimatography is really one of the best features. I've never seen anything like it.

I loved the book, i just haven't gotten around to watching this yet.

Beautiful, charming, quirky, and funny! Maybe a bit on the sticky sweet side but it really is fantastic. Its so optimistic and peaceful. John Krasinski and Maya Rudolph play a type of lovers that are very rarely shown on screen. I had really wanted to see this since it first came out, and really was not disappointed at all. In fact, it was more entertaining that I expected.

Great movie

Really good movie. I was kind of skeptical because i'm not all that fond of martial arts movies, but this was really good. It was lush and intoxicating. I'm not totally sure about them flying around though.... I was the only time it left for fantasy, if thats what it was. Still, great, great film.

I really like the book, but this just wasn't very good. I feel asleep.

Persepolis really wasn?t what I expected at all. To begin with the trailer I watched compared it to Juno, and I fail to see the resemblance? Between that, and the style of the animation, which is reminiscent of Emily the Strange, I really was expecting some kind of sarcastic black comedy. In parts it is, but on the whole it shows some of the problems with the Iran society. Like Paradise Now, it shows what drives the people over there, and the great difference between what we perceive here in the states and what is actually occurring over there. Unlike Paradise Now, Persepolis really isn?t a hopeful tale. It also seems to be pushing an agenda and I really didn?t catch what is was. It shows what is wrong, but it doesn?t show what could be done to make life better. Persepolis picks the scab without offering a bandage. I?ve always kind of enjoyed films in this style, like V for Vendetta or Paradise Now as well as dystopian books like Animal Farm and 1984. Persepolis really fits in well with these types of works, even though it?s (loosely) based on facts. Idk, it wasn?t what I was expecting at all, but it really was pretty good.

Really a crummy movie

I really thought this was going to be good, but it just wasn't. There is no way around it. I actually only watched 20 minutes or so of it, so its possible there was something in the rest of it that would change my mind completely. But what i watched of Peaceful Warrior was a lame cliched mess that was mostly a sports drama with a new-age edge. I really didn't care for it at all.

I watched this mostly just because I had some time on my hands and I?d never actually seen it. I?m usually not all that fond of ?classic? movies, but Breakfast at Tiffany?s is very good. It has to be one of the most iconic Hollywood films of all time. The image of Audrey Hepburn complete with cigarette and black dress can be found on anything from t-shirts to napkins. Henry Mancinni?s ?Moon River? is also beautiful and haunting. Another thing I found interesting is how timeless the film feels even though it was made, and placed, in the 60?s. Nothing really looks all that dated. I?m usually not all that crazy about happy endings but this one was pretty satisfying, though the bit where the cat is thrown from the taxi is surprisingly emotional. I watched Breakfast at Tiffany?s on an impulse, but I?ll definitely be viewing it again.

Fantastic movie! Vincent Price is brilliant. The rest is really pretty good too, but its based on a Poe story so it had great material to work with. The only bad thing was Mark Damon, he really cannot act at all, and also had some really poor dialog. Still, i liked it alot.

This is going to sooo wierd. Amazing, but wierd.

I really enjoyed this very much. I have no idea how it compares to the old BBC series, but the film was well composed and easy to follow. It was kind of odd seeing Dumbledore and Professor Trelawney from Harry Potter playing British Aristocrats. All of the acting was amazing, and Brideshead manor itself was pretty stunning. As a romance it really wasn?t all that remarkable. Bella and Edward, Benjamin Button and Daisy, and even Wall-E and Eve made far more interesting lovers than any of those played here. However, in the big picture Brideshead Revisited is well worth watching.

i really liked the book, but the movie doesn't look great

I love the book, but i can't really picture it as a movie. but i want to watch this someday

cute movie.

A stylish Tim Burton movie driven by dark romance and black humor with Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter: What exactly could be bad?

Its okay, but i didn't quite see what all the hype was about.

THE HILLS ARE ALIVE!!!!!

classic

One of my all time favorate movies =]

Great movie. One of my favorites.

Nick and Norah?s Infinite Playlist is one of my favorite books, and think I really liked the movie just as much. It was toned down a lot, content wise, from the book, but it still carried the same style and feel. It also seemed to be trying to tap into the popularity of Juno, but still, it?s very good. = ]

Really pretty good, better than i was expecting.

mmmm..... i'm really not excited about this at all anymore..... =\

Great movie

I can honestly say I enjoyed this movie. At first I was skeptical because I usually don?t care for films like this at all. These type of family films always seem to be bogged down by poor dialog, an overly serious storyline, and obnoxious humor and characters. For example Kit: An American Girl, Bridge to Terribithia, or The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian. Usually if I were to say that a movie of this type is ?good? it translates into that there was nothing in it that made me want to come at the screen with a sledge hammer, or that it actually had a few well done sequences. City of Ember may take itself a bit seriously, but the movie works extremely well. I wasn?t crazy about the book, it had an interesting idea, but it was seemed typical and clichéd in its characters and style. Now, there wasn?t any one thing that was particularly amazing or remarkable in City of Ember, but the movie is structured surprisingly well. It moves towards a central goal and isn?t bogged down by unnecessary subplots, and there are no unneeded sequences. Its fairly dark, but no to the point that it is fake and corny, like the previously mentioned Prince Caspian. While City of Ember is not a movie that I would necessarily want to watch again, it was well made, fairly engaging, and well worth watching.

It 'dazzled' me.

I read the books, they were pretty good, so i want to see this when its out.

Great movie

Pretty decent, nor bad but not that memorible either. Parts were really pretty cliched and hokey, but it still wasn't terrible.

Fairly terrible movie. I loved the book. but i didn't care for the movie much at all. Its just unconvincing and dumb. The book had the power to make you laugh and cry, and the movie does neither. There are spots were its obvious you are supposed to, but I failed to care that much. I thought Hilary Swank was kind of annoying too. Overall, it wasn't downright awful, its certainly watchible, it just isn't very good.

Mmmm, it was pretty decent. It followed the book very closly. Its just not that memoralble of a film. But its a fairly engaging, well acted drama. I had kind of forgotten how much of a powerhouse actress Dakato Fanning is. She really held up alot of the film. Its certainly not a second watcher, but it really isn't terrible either.

I didn't like this nearly as much as i had expected too. I love Hunter Thompson's work and Johnny Depp, but this just didn't seem that great.

I read Tuck Everlasting pretty much monthly for years.

I wasn't all that crazy about the storyline of The Constant Gardener, but i absolutely loved watching it. Its really ingenius and artistic in the way it was filmed. I also really like Ralph Fienne and Rachel Weisz. After the first hour it died a bit, but its still really good.

the Night Watch books were amazing, so i really want to watch this sometime, but its kind of hard to find.... =\

Great movie

=]]]]]]]]]]

Probly my least favorate one of these

Its not nearly as terrible as i had expected. Its much better than The Chronicles of Narnia or The Golden Compass, which kind of surprised me because i really didn't like the book that much. Bredan Fraser was really annoying, but i read or heard somewhere that he was who the author actually wanted to play the role... so..... Jim Broadbent was brilliant. I wouldn't watch it again, but Inkhear really wasn't terrible.

Great Movie.

dumb movie........... >_<

Amazing film, great story and great performances from Natalie Portman, JIm Sturgess, and Kristin Scott Thomas.

Lame adaption of an amazing book. Seriously, pass it by.

Not a masterpiece by any means but its so taky and corny its hilarious and captivating.

odd, but good. You kind of get the feeling your supposed to relate to him in some way, but i didn't at all.....

The book was really pretty good. I'm kind of surprised its rated r though sense its a christian book/film.

Surprisingly good movie. I am usually not all that fond of period movies; but the duchess is pretty good. It starts out kind of choppy, but it gets better as it goes on. I was surprised at how visual it was. Usually these types of films really are not. Keira Knightley was really good. She looked old though. idk how old she is, but she really looked old enough to be portraying a mother-which she was- as oppsed to say a character like Cecilia in Atonement. I usually like Ralph Fiennes quite a lot, but he is kind of stale and dull here. Really, it was all around a good film.

Good movie.

Pretty good.

I really do not see the fasination with this movie/book at all. Its one of the biggest disappointments ever for me. The movie kind of reminded me of National Treasure, only its slighty more mature. Tom Hanks is pretty annoying, but i do not care for him much anyway. I fell asleep before the end, and that really didn't bother me at all.

......... dumb movie >_<

I really didn't expect to like this at all, but its really good. Edward Norton, Helena Bonham Carter, and Brad Pitt are extraordinary. It kind of reminded me of books like The Chocolate War or The Outsiders.

Great movie. Its visual, moving, and completely believible. It is not really about much at all, but its still really intoxicating to watch. =]

Extraordinary movie.

FINAAAALLY A TRAILER!!!!! OMG! it looks incredible. Can't Wait!