CCBC-Net Archives
[CCBC-Net] Picture books to movies
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: James Elliott <libraryjim>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 10:39:44 -0400 (EDT)
Susan,
I disliked the Live action "Grinch" immensely -- especially as a more worldly-wise friend pointed out that it started out with a 'spouse swap' key exchange party (the scene where they go into a party at the beginning and put their house keys in a jar -- according to my friend, the wives would then pick out a key and go home with who -- or rather Who -- ever belonged to that key! not at all kid-friendly. Of course it went right over my head, too). But they put way too much other garbage into that movie.
I also avoided "Cat in the Hat" as well, simply because the ads looked pathetic.
"Jumanji" worked ok, In fact, I rather liked that one. I only saw parts of 'Zathura', it didn't hold my interest at all.
I still love the movie version of "Mary Poppins", even though it's not like the book. I've heard that "Nanny McPhee" is closer to the vision of Mary Poppins, at least at the first, but since it's based on her own book series, I can't say. I liked it, too, and didn't expect to.
"Doctor Doolittle" -- I liked the Rex Harrison version, but not the Eddie Murphy versions. IMO, he strayed too far from the source material.
"Series of Unfortunate Events" I actually had hoped they would have made more of these, and thought they kept the ambiance of the books very well, even though they rearranged the sequence of the books.
Jim Elliott North Georgia
----- Original Message ----- From: Susan Kusel <Skusel at arlingtonva.us> Subject: [CCBC-Net] Picture books to movies
Something I haven't seen addressed in this discussion yet is adaptations of picture books. I think these movies are the ones I dread the most simply because of logistics.
Obviously, if you take a 32 page picture book and turn it into a 90 minute movie, you're going to have to add an enormous amount of material. Particularly with a book like Where the Wild Things Are, which has fairly sparse text to begin with. I used to work in children's theater, and this was an issue there too, because many picture books have been adapted for the stage. I think some work better than others.... but really, it all depends on the skill of the adapter, and if they truly understand the vision behind the original book.
For example, I didn't think the extra material in Jim Carrey's How the Grinch Stole Christmas really worked. I'm curious to see what will happen with Where the Wild Things Are... I've got my fingers crossed.
For me, the Weston Woods adaptations work perfectly because they stay completely true to the original material. I'm not sure if feature films are as good a medium for picture books, but maybe that's just me.
-Susan
Susan Kusel
Youth Services Librarian
Received on Thu 13 Aug 2009 09:39:44 AM CDT
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 10:39:44 -0400 (EDT)
Susan,
I disliked the Live action "Grinch" immensely -- especially as a more worldly-wise friend pointed out that it started out with a 'spouse swap' key exchange party (the scene where they go into a party at the beginning and put their house keys in a jar -- according to my friend, the wives would then pick out a key and go home with who -- or rather Who -- ever belonged to that key! not at all kid-friendly. Of course it went right over my head, too). But they put way too much other garbage into that movie.
I also avoided "Cat in the Hat" as well, simply because the ads looked pathetic.
"Jumanji" worked ok, In fact, I rather liked that one. I only saw parts of 'Zathura', it didn't hold my interest at all.
I still love the movie version of "Mary Poppins", even though it's not like the book. I've heard that "Nanny McPhee" is closer to the vision of Mary Poppins, at least at the first, but since it's based on her own book series, I can't say. I liked it, too, and didn't expect to.
"Doctor Doolittle" -- I liked the Rex Harrison version, but not the Eddie Murphy versions. IMO, he strayed too far from the source material.
"Series of Unfortunate Events" I actually had hoped they would have made more of these, and thought they kept the ambiance of the books very well, even though they rearranged the sequence of the books.
Jim Elliott North Georgia
----- Original Message ----- From: Susan Kusel <Skusel at arlingtonva.us> Subject: [CCBC-Net] Picture books to movies
Something I haven't seen addressed in this discussion yet is adaptations of picture books. I think these movies are the ones I dread the most simply because of logistics.
Obviously, if you take a 32 page picture book and turn it into a 90 minute movie, you're going to have to add an enormous amount of material. Particularly with a book like Where the Wild Things Are, which has fairly sparse text to begin with. I used to work in children's theater, and this was an issue there too, because many picture books have been adapted for the stage. I think some work better than others.... but really, it all depends on the skill of the adapter, and if they truly understand the vision behind the original book.
For example, I didn't think the extra material in Jim Carrey's How the Grinch Stole Christmas really worked. I'm curious to see what will happen with Where the Wild Things Are... I've got my fingers crossed.
For me, the Weston Woods adaptations work perfectly because they stay completely true to the original material. I'm not sure if feature films are as good a medium for picture books, but maybe that's just me.
-Susan
Susan Kusel
Youth Services Librarian
Received on Thu 13 Aug 2009 09:39:44 AM CDT
