i love Planet of the Apes but the book is very very different from the novel. not sure i'd consider it a good adaption. great film though.
I think that raises the question of how one defines "good adaptation." Does it mean an accurate/faithful adaptation? I don't believe so. Because the definition of the word "adapt" is "change to fit new circumstances." So to me, a good adaptation isn't one that copies the original as closely as possible. That's more atavism than adaptation. A good adaptation is one that changes the source work in a good way. By that standard, PotA is a very good adaptation. It changed the story in a way that resulted in a classic that transcended its source material.
Good point. We shouldn't take for granted that "best" equals "most faithful." Fidelity to the original source is not
the only criteria that matters, or even the most important.
It's possible to make a perfectly faithful adaptation that doesn't work at all as a film, or to take major liberties and still come up with a great movie or TV show.