I LOVE Alfonso Cuarón’s sci-fi action movie Children of Men. I’ve watched maybe six times and every time, the ending always almost brings me to tears. So when I learned it was adapted from P.D. James’ book of the same name, it was a no-brainer deciding what my next book would be.
After finishing the book, it wasn’t difficult to reach to the conclusion that I enjoyed the movie better.
While James’ book gives a more in-depth look at how human infertility and humanity’s slow death march towards extinction affects the sexual dynamic between men and women and almost demented ways humans try to cope with a world without children or a race of dead men walking, I feel the book dedicates WAY too much time describing the failing of human civilization and the Regrets and guilt of Theo Faron. It’s not even until after 2/3 through the book where it feels like the plot and story are properly paced and stuff of consequence actually begin to happen.
The film’s adaptation by, comparison, feels consistent in its pacing and the world building and woe-is-mes of Theo feel more compact a take up less of the audience’s time.
What books do you feel were worse than its film adaptation and why?
I’m not going to downvote you because you’re not a jerk about it, just stating how you feel. But I’m gonna be a little bit of a jerk lol.
I thought they were dry and a really dense read when I was 12, but I still got some enjoyment from them. By high school they were quite good to me and easier to read. As an adult they’re an incredibly stimulating read. So it’s hard for me to hear how they’re dry or put you to sleep as someone else replied…and not see it as childish I guess
I think even people who love lotr should be able to admit how dry Tolkien’s writing is if they’re considering it in good faith. His strength was as a world builder and story constructor, but he was not a good storyteller.
Now this one is a genuinely bad take. Have you read The Hobbit? After 86 years and plenty of changes in convention and language, it remains one of the most pleasant and approachable fantasy novels available. Even if you don’t enjoy LOTR…there’s nothing “good faith” about a blanket claim that his writing is dry or boring, or that he just wasn’t a good storyteller.
LOTR is long, both expansive and detailed, (mostly) serious, written in language that isn’t as familiar today, and layers a lot of subtlety into the prose. I found it a dense read. As a child. The same would have been true for a lot of popular contemporary fantasy had I attempted it at 12…in fact the more praise an author receives specifically for their prose, the more difficult and boring I would have found it. There’s nothing wrong with accessible Sanderson directness, but there’s plenty of room for other styles and they aren’t inherently bad just because they’re a little more challenging and require some focus.
I’m not a Tolkien fanboy, LOTR not in my personal favorite top 5 book series, and I’d have to think a while about who would round out top 10. This is the most I’ve spoken or written about his work in several years. But I cannot “in good faith” call it dry, or agree that the movies are better.
When I start reading LotR, I find it hard to put down until the end. Outside of some segments (I admit to skimming Bombadil… I love the idea of Bombadil, I don’t like the execution much), it flows smoothly. People might facetiously throw around “Descriptions of every leaf and twig”, but I never found his descriptions to take away from the flow.
The songs on the other hand…
I def skim the songs lol, I’ll admit that.