Decent movie versions of classic novels

[JD]

I've seen and enjoyed the Disney 20,000 Leagues and Guy Pearce CoMC and I will probably watch them again either before or after the books.
How close is the Francis Ford Coppola/Gary Oldman Dracula (one of my favorite movies) to the book? I read the play script in High School and from what I remember it was pretty close to that. We were actually going to do that as our play that year, but then the school higher ups had a fit and refused to let us do it. Instead we did a Children's Storybook theater type thing . Talk about going from one extreme to the other. I'm pretty sure we would have probably gotten alot bigger audiance with Dracula, but oh well. As you can tell this still pisses me off, because our Dracula would have been pretty cool (for a HS play, of course).

[Davros]

Greg Cox wrote:

---

It's probably worth noting that the most faithful movie adaptation is not always the best one.

But it can be, and if filmakers are not going to use the story they probably should be using the title. Some changes are understandable for the sake of time, but some changes go too far and some make no sense at all in making like the elves at Helms Deep in the Two Towers for example.

The Charles Laughton version of THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME completely changes the ending, but works as a classic movie in its own right. Which is often the case.

Which does nothing to show that it is better that way than sticking to the original ending.

[Lapis Exilis]

I've never seen a movie version of Tarzan that came close to the atmosphere and tone of the book, but the early 1930s movie, particularly Tarzan, The Ape Man and Tarzan and his Mate are great movies in their own rights.

I've no idea how authentic a translation it is, since I never read the book, but the 1998 Man in the Iron Mask, with Gabriel Byrne, Jeremy Irons, Gerard Depardieu, John Malcovich and Leonardo DiCaprio is one of my favorite movies.

[JD]

CaptainCanada wrote:

---

Disney version; immensely underrated.

I love Disney's Tarzan. It was what introduced me to Phil Collins.

The 1970s version with, among others, Michael York, is probably the best version at the moment.

Les Mes

Mid-90s version with Liam Neeson as Valjean.

I've actually had this in my Netflix Que since before I started my classics read. I'm a huge fan of Liam Neeson, Claire Danes, Geoffrey Rush and Uma Thurman, so as soon as I saw them in it I added it.
Oliver Twis

Polanski's version was good, for a straight
take; the musical is quite fun, too.

Ugh, Polanski. After learning what he did, I try not to watch his movies, but I made an exception for Rosemary's Baby, so I guess I might make one for this too.
Sherlock Holmes

The recent Robert Downey Jr. version is a very fun action-oriented take.

Saw it and loved it.

For more classical ones, apart from the BBC stuff that everyone recommends, there's a very good 1979 film called Murder By Decree starring Christopher Plummer as Holmes.

Oooo Gen. Chang!

50s Disney version.

The only film version that really comes close to the novel (that I've seen) is Kenneth Branagh's early 90s take; it's flawed, but worth seeing.

I'm a big fan of most of the cast of that one, so it's actually been on my Netflix Instant Que pretty much since I started it. I just haven't gotten around to watching it yet.

[Greg Cox]

Bishop76 wrote:

---

I would strongly recommend you stay far away from any direct Lovecraft adaptations except Reanimator, which is just fun (and not really a direct adaptation). Everything else is kicked-in-the-dick awful.

.

I thought DAGON wasn't a bad stab at Lovecraftian horror.

[Bishop76]

Greg Cox wrote:

---

I thought DAGON wasn't a bad stab at Lovecraftian horror.

Yeah, it was a decent attempt at The Shadow Over Innsmouth. Pretty shoddy acting, but Reanimator has the same problem, really. I guess I could let Dagon slide by.

I like Harry Potter !

[Kirkman1987]

Here are the ones I suggest. I will be going off general quality and not accuracy, but will make some notes if I know the book well enough.


The Invisible Man

1933 version with Claude Raines. follows the basic premise of the book (although not exact) and on it's own is one of the best horror films of the era. Incredible special effects for the time.

HP Lovecraft's stories

Murky waters here, and you will hear many opinions. I suggest watching Re-animator if you can stomach the gore. Also watch In The Mouth of Madness, even though it's only inspired by Lovecraft.

Tarzan

I've never read the original stories, but know enough to realize that the Weissmuller films are nothing like the books. regardless, the first two in the series (Tarzan and Tarzan and his mate) are fantastic escapist entertainment.

Sherlock Holmes

A lot of great options here. The most accurate thing you will find is the Jeremy Brett television series. They follow the stories very closely, and feature good production values. Many consider Brett the definitive Holmes. I also recommend The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes (a comedy).

Phantom of the Opera

The Silent Lon Chaney version. No question

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea

As others have said, the Disney version is a lot of fun, if a little silly.

Frankenstein

Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein, although they have little to do with the book. Bride is one of the best sequels of all time, not to mention one of the funniest horror films ever.


Edit - I don't think anyone mentioned Horror of Dracula, the first Dracula film Christopher Lee did. It's a really cool adaptation of the book, with some neat changes that make that movie very fresh.

[AviTrek]

JD wrote:

---

Peter Pann

I can't think of a good version of the classic story, but Hook is a great movie about an adult Pan(Robin Williams) returning to Neverland.

JD wrote:

---

Pinocchio

I don't know how accurate the Disney movie is, but it's a classic on its own as a movie.

JD wrote:

---

Sherlock Holmes

People have already mentioned the Jeremy Brett series, and I completely agree. Also, the new BBC series starring Benedict Cumberbatch is great. It's set in modern day London and the stories are more inspired by Doyle than direct reproductions, but they're great.

[Lonemagpie]

JD wrote:

---

Three Musketeers

The 1970s Richard Lester versions are the best - and surprisingly faithful the tone of the original novels.

[Mysterion]

Best page-to-screen adaptation I can think of is the 1978 PBS version of Ursula LeGuin's The Lathe of Heaven. Bruce Davison is a perfect George Orr and the script/production mirrors LeGuin's writing about as well as one could want it to.

There is apparantly a later version (1990's?) that was done for A&E that I've heard nothing good about.

[Spaceman Spiff]

CaptainCanada wrote:

---

The only film version that really comes close to the novel (that I've seen) is Kenneth Branagh's early 90s take; it's flawed, but worth seeing.

There's an old Swedish production called Terror of Frankenstein that's the most faithful one I've seen. It's probably faithful enough to be shown to a class studying the novel.

It's a decent little movie, but if you check it out, be warned that it's very dry. I'm glad to have it, but it illustrates why adaptations of the novel tend to spice it up a bit.

[Lapis Exilis]

JD wrote:

---

How close is the Francis Ford Coppola/Gary Oldman Dracula (one of my favorite movies) to the book?

The Coppola version is not particularly accurate since it hinges on the idea of Mina as a reincarnated version of Vlad the Impaler's bride - something that is completely invented outside the book, though Elizabeta was a real historical personage who did indeed throw herself from the castle tower. But the movie does follow the plot of the book fairly closely with the exception of the Drac/ Mina seduction scenes.

[Captaindemotion]

The Coppola version is one of the few Dracula adaptations that retains his moustache from the novel, as well as Drac's being able to walk in daylight.

[Greg Cox]

Lapis Exilis wrote:

---

The Coppola version is not particularly accurate since it hinges on the idea of Mina as a reincarnated version of Vlad the Impaler's bride - something that is completely invented outside the book, though Elizabeta was a real historical personage who did indeed throw herself from the castle tower. But the movie does follow the plot of the book fairly closely with the exception of the Drac/ Mina seduction scenes.

The idea that Mina is the likeness of Vlad's long-lost love seems to date back to the 1970's tv version with Jack Palance, scripted by Richard Matheson.

Although, of course, this concept has also been a staple of mummy movies since day one, so it could have just been imported for there.