From “To Kill a Mockingbird” to “It”, and “Game of Thrones” to “American Gods”, consumers have seen their fair share of book-to-film adaptations. Many book lovers fear their favorite publication turning cinematic, while others welcome the idea.
“I’m all for it,” said Spencer Peterson, a senior at Utah State University. “It’s cool to see things that you just had to picture in your head before. Especially when the movie does the book justice.”
Jeffrey Ormsby, a USU senior, said he prefers to watch movies because he doesn’t read for fun very often.
“It’s a more efficient format because a movie can tell a story much faster than a book can,” he said.
Ormsby said film adaptations can even improve storytelling. In the case of “Game of Thrones”, he believes the series has outperformed the books by focusing more on substance and less on side stories.
Students like Ormsby and Peterson cite “The Lord of the Rings”, “The Green Mile”, “The Princess Bride” and “Fight Club” as examples of good book-to-film adaptations.
Emily Stalder, a USU junior, said she often feels the book is better.
“I think that adaptations can be good, but most of the time they are poorly done,” she said.
Stalder said at most times, films sacrifice character development and plot for more romance and overly dramatized action scenes.
USU student Trenton Behunin said that poor book-to-film adaptations depart from storylines and characters and are often a conglomerate of bad acting and directing.
“When the adaptation of a book you like sucks, it’s pretty much the worst thing ever,” he said.
Stalder and Behunin mourn the adaptations of films such as “Eragon,” “Percy Jackson” and “A Series of Unfortunate Events”.
“(Readers) don’t want their favorite books to get butchered, but at the same time a movie done well is great,” Stalder said.