SHERDOG MOVIE CLUB: Let's pick the Week 108 movie!

[europe1]

NOTE to NON-MEMBERS: Interested in joining the SHERDOG MOVIE CLUB? Shoot me a PM for more info.

Here's a quick list of all movies watched by the SMC.

The Casanova of voluptious Farm Fowls has picked his theme!

Theme is comic book movies, and in an unprecedented move on my part I've only seen 1 of these previously.

Here are our candidates!


Ghost World (2001)

Director: Terry Zwigoff

Cast: Thora Birch, Scarlet Johansson, Steve Buscemi

Plot: With only the plan of moving in together after high school, two unusually devious friends seek direction in life. As a mere gag, they respond to a man's newspaper ad for a date, only to find it will greatly complicate their lives.






Oldboy (2003)

Director: Chan-wook Park

Cast: Min-sik Choi, Ji-tae Yoo, Hye-jung Kang

Plot: After being kidnapped and imprisoned for fifteen years, Oh Dae-Su is released, only to find that he must find his captor in five days.






Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (2010)

Director: Edgar Wright

Cast: Michael Cera, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Chris Evans, Alison Pill, Brie Larson, Aubrey Plaza, Jason Schwartzman

Plot: Scott Pilgrim must defeat his new girlfriend's seven evil exes in order to win her heart.






Dredd (2012)

Director: Pete Travis

Cast: Karl Urban, Olivia Thirlby, Lena Headey, Wood Harris

Plot: In a violent, futuristic city where the police have the authority to act as judge, jury and executioner, a cop teams with a trainee to take down a gang that deals the reality-altering drug, SLO-MO.

Members: @shadow_priest_x @europe1 @MusterX @Scott Parker 27 @the muntjac @Cubo de Sangre @sickc0d3r @chickenluver @FrontNakedChoke @AndersonsFoot @Tufts

chickenluver's Top 10 for this week is...

Top 5/10 is going to be Favorite Movies Adapted from Source Material that you have read and enjoyed. Could be a novel, short story, stage play, opera, epic poem, comic book, etc.

​

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Oldboy was a comic?

 

[Guestx]

Rare week where I've seen them all. Now just to figure out which one I want to rewatch. . .

EDIT: Not sure I've seen Ghost World after reviewing the trailer. Think I may have been getting it confused with something else. Hmm. . .

 

[chickenluver]

I'm going to do a top 13

13. Captain America: The Winter Solider
12. Logan
11. Let the Right One In
10. Oldboy
9. Frankenstein (1931)
8. The Exorcist
7. Julius Caesar (1953)
6. Polanski's Macbeth
5. I, Claudius
4. Chimes at Midnight
3. Throne of Blood
2. Ran
1. Barry Lyndon

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

I don't read enough to participate in this week's poll. Oddly, the good adaptations (eg. Clockwork Orange, Silence of the Lambs) I read after watching the films. The books I've read prior to the films were all underwhelming adaptations (eg. The Hot Zone, Zodiac).

 

[europe1]

Top 5/10 is going to be Favorite Movies Adapted from Source Material that you have read and enjoyed. Could be a novel, short story, stage play, opera, epic poem, comic book, etc.

This is with the restriction that I had to like said novels... my favorite film is Stalker, and I've read the novel it was based on, Roadside Picnic, but actually didn't like that novel. Other examples being Dracula movies, The Masque of the Red Death, The Man who Would be King, She, The Thirteen Warrior, etc.

I'm excluding biblical stories here... just 'cuz they would take up to much space. Could be a top 10 on its own.


1. Shane (easily the book I liked the least on this list though)
2. A Clockwork Orange
3. Dune
4. Evil
5. El Cid (extremely loose adoptation but it still counts)
6. The Andromeda Strain
7. Farenheight 451
8. Being There
9. Brott och Straff (Crime and Punishment)
10. Matango (The Voice in the Night)

Plus whatever I forgot.

EDIT: Should have spliced in John Carter in there, would have taken the nr 4th spot.


Plus childhood favorite...

Spoiler

As a kid I always wanted to kill Christopher Lee with a sword too after watching Mio my Mio...

And The Brothers Lionheart as well...

I often don't read novels of movies that I've liked. I just often don't really feel the need to re-visit such stories.

I started reading The Maltest Falcon and The Big Sleep but stopped quite early. Not because I thought they were bad or anything. They where great! It was just that they where so damn similar to the movies that I didn't see much of a point! Though... that said... actually reading The Big Sleep might make me understand what the hell is going on in that movie.

 

[Guestx]

Interesting Top 5/10 we have this week. I think I'll go with a Top 5. In my case, I often ended up reading the book AFTER I saw the movie though. Not sure how far I'd get if I was only going with movies where I read the book first.

5. The Social Network
4. Murder on the Orient Express (1971)
3. 2001: A Space Odyssey
2. The Exorcist
1. Jurassic Park

And here's a book that I think is long overdue for an adaptation:

 

[europe1]

Voting for the one movie I haven't seen.

Damit chickenluver! You do a theme about comic-book movies that you haven't seen and you don't go with Tarkan vs the Vikings!? This is an outrageous level of wrongful decision-making on your end! I'm shocked and appaled, shocked and appaled I tell ya!

GOAT comic book movie.

And I'm just going to be nice and assume that you've already seen Danger: Diabolik.

6. Julius Caesar (1953)
5. Polanski's Macbeth
4. Chimes at Midnight
3. Throne of Blood
2. Ran

That's a chickenluver list if ever I saw one.

11. Let the Right One In

Heard wildly different things about that novel. Seems to be a love-it-ot-hate-it affair.

 

[That209]

Just watch The Impossible Kid

 

[chickenluver]

From looking at some of these lists I've realized I left off many great Kubrick films. I wouldn't go so far as to say The Shining and A Clockwork Orange were bad novels, but I didn't care much for them. I really liked 2001 the novel, but left it off the list since the movie is not truly an adaptation of it. The one I really need to watch again is Lolita. I always liked that movie well enough, but since reading the novel it's difficult not to regard the film as superfluous, and missing the point. Then again this is Kubrick we're talking about.

Oldboy was a comic?

Guy if it wins I'll get into this more, but it's probably the loosest film adaptation I know of. Virtually nothing that happens in the movie happens in the comic, except that a man is mysteriously imprisoned for years and then released.

I don't read enough to participate in this week's poll. Oddly, the good adaptations (eg. Clockwork Orange, Silence of the Lambs) I read after watching the films. The books I've read prior to the films were all underwhelming adaptations (eg. The Hot Zone, Zodiac).

That's a nice top 2 you have there at least.

I liked the Red Dragon novel. Got Silence of the Lambs sitting on the book shelf right this moment just waiting to be opened.

my favorite film is Stalker, and I've read the novel it was based on, Roadside Picnic, but actually didn't like that novel.

How come?

3. Dune

I imagine you're in the minority here.

EDIT: Should have spliced in John Carter in there, would have taken the nr 4th spot.

Did you know that movie is the biggest box office bomb of all time? It lost potentially as much as $200 million. I never did see it. I thought the first John Carter novel was pretty good as far as hyper-masculine wish fulfillment escapist fantasy goes. I kind of want to read the rest of the series. Pretty lame that there will never be any more movie adaptations.

Though... that said... actually reading The Big Sleep might make me understand what the hell is going on in that movie.

Probably not since even the author of the novel Raymond Chandler said he didn't know who killed the chauffeur.

In my case, I often ended up reading the book AFTER I saw the movie though. Not sure how far I'd get if I was only going with movies where I read the book first.

It's the same for me. Although when it comes to classic novels with multiple adaptations I like to read the book first.

3. 2001: A Space Odyssey
2. The Exorcist

1. Jurassic Park

Would you say fans of the movie should read the book?

Did you ever read Jaws?

Damit chickenluver! You do a theme about comic-book movies that you haven't seen and you don't go with Tarkan vs the Vikings!? This is an outrageous level of wrongful decision-making on your end! I'm shocked and appaled, shocked and appaled I tell ya!

Never heard of it. Can't say I have much familiarity with Turkish comics. I'll have to watch the original film first of course.

And I'm just going to be nice and assume that you've already seen Danger: Diabolik.

Sure haven't.

That's a chickenluver list if ever I saw one.

Those five are definitely the best of Shakespeare on screen for me. And they represent different adaptation methods. Ultra faithful and straightforward with Julius Caesar, mostly faithful with the violence and evilness heavily emphasized in Polankski's Macbeth, conversion to another culture and language with some notable narrative and characterization changes in the Kurosawa films, and finally Orson Welles savagely cuts and pastes together bits from multiple plays yet somehow makes it brilliant.

Heard wildly different things about that novel. Seems to be a love-it-ot-hate-it affair.

I watched the movie and loved it. Then I read the book, and as I was reading it I liked the greater detail, especially concerning the side story about the guy who loses his best friend and girlfriend to the vampire. The book was also much more violent and gruesome. I watched the movie for a second time almost immediately after finishing the novel, either the same day or the next day. That was a mistake, because I got the same feeling I usually get when I do that, namely like I'm experiencing the story in fast forward, and with key details missing or de-emphasized. So that second watch was a real disappointment.

All that being said, since then a few years have gone by, and I've watched the film for a third time. Thinking on them both now I'd say I prefer the movie, mostly because of the atmosphere and tone, and the performances of the child actors. The content I felt was missing at one time is really not an essential part of the central story. A lot of what is essential is still in the movie, but done more subtly, sometimes only hinted at. It's worth noting that Lindqvist himself adapted his novel into the screenplay.

You would probably be able to get more out of the novel than I did by virtue of reading it its original language. Reading translated literature is like wearing a raincoat in the shower.

On a weird side note, I also attended a performance of a stage adaptation done by the Scottish National Theatre. It was quite well done.

 

[Guestx]

It's the same for me. Although when it comes to classic novels with multiple adaptations I like to read the book first.

Most faithful Dracula adaptation. . .

Would you say fans of the movie should read the book?

Definitely maybe.

I'll put it this way, you would not necessarily like the book just because you liked the movie. They are quite different from one another.

The book has more of cold, technical feel to it and it lacks the warmth that Spielberg brought to the story. It's more adult-oriented rather than fun for all ages like the movie.

I enjoyed both but definitely liked the movie more.

Did you ever read Jaws?

Thought about it but haven't done it.

 

[europe1]

How come?

Several reasons.

Firstly, I just didn't like the prose (I read the english translation). I am really generous when it comes to liking movies -- but really harsh and pedantic when it comes to liking novels. There are several books that I've just not got into due to not liking the writing-style.

Secondly, the movie is all about a journey into The Zone. The novel is quite the opposite, most of it is about the area around the Zone, how the Zones presence has changed the societies that exist around it (mutations, socioeconomic, sticks like that). Frankly, I just didn't find this very captivating. This is really bad since the chapters that actually deal with Stalking the Zone are really good and gripping.

Lastly, the novel just lacks forward-propulsion and cohesiveness. It's a much more episodic in nature. Not good.

I imagine you're in the minority here.

Hey at least it's better than Star Wars.

Never heard of it. Can't say I have much familiarity with Turkish comics.

One of the most slapdash, madcap, eye-popping pieces of fantasy-adventure what-the-fuckery I've ever seen. It's hilariously awesome.

I'll have to watch the original film first of course.

The films have nothing to do with each other except sharing the main character.

Did you know that movie is the biggest box office bomb of all time? It lost potentially as much as $200 million

Oh yes... I still love it of course.

I thought the first John Carter novel was pretty good as far as hyper-masculine wish fulfillment escapist fantasy goes.

Yeah that pretty much describes every Edgar Rice Burroughs book.

I kind of want to read the rest of the series.

Yeah... about that... I've tried...

Even on the second book the quality plunges like a refrigerator being thrown down the grand canyon. It gets really bad, really fast.

Reading translated literature is like wearing a raincoat in the shower.

I actually find that reading about translation-processes are really fun. It gives you an idea how languages work and are different from one another, not to mention all the cultural baggage that comes with words.

I remember reading something about the Chinese translation of the "To be or not to be, that is the question" phrase from Hamlet. Basically, due to the nature of the Chinese language, the closest phrasing that they could come to that sentence was "Yes or No, that is the question?"

Kinda loses it's effect, doesn't it?

To keep going with the Chinese examples, ever read much Gore Vidal? I've read his novel Creation. In one part of that story, his protagonist is stranded in Ancient China. Sluggishly, he starts learning the language there. One think keeps confusing him -- when his (essentially slave-master) keeps mentioning "wolf-people". It takes him quite a while to figure out that this just seems to mean foreigners.

 

[moreorless87]

Scott Pilgrim is IMHO a very undervalued film, people tend to get turned off by the subject matter but to some degree Wright is poking fun at it plus you could argue its the ultimate example of his direction/editing style.

 

[moreorless87]

Several reasons.

Firstly, I just didn't like the prose (I read the english translation). I am really generous when it comes to liking movies -- but really harsh and pedantic when it comes to liking novels. There are several books that I've just not got into due to not liking the writing-style.

Secondly, the movie is all about a journey into The Zone. The novel is quite the opposite, most of it is about the area around the Zone, how the Zones presence has changed the societies that exist around it (mutations, socioeconomic, sticks like that). Frankly, I just didn't find this very captivating. This is really bad since the chapters that actually deal with Stalking the Zone are really good and gripping.

Lastly, the novel just lacks forward-propulsion and cohesiveness. It's a much more episodic in nature. Not good.

Not read it but I always kind of assumed that a lot of the philsopy/atmosphere was more unique to Tarkovskys film, it just feels so much inline with The Mirror in style. Looking at the description of the original novel perhaps rather an influence on Annihilation(book and film)?

The problem Lynch's Dune has always had IMHO is that it was too strange for mainstream audiences yet too different from the book for fans. It was actually one of the first artier films I saw growing up(and the first Lynch by many years) so it definitely holds a special place for me there even though I'v become a bigger fan of the book afterwards. You could argue though that Lynch does capture a lot of the atmosphere of Heberts setting far moreso than the TV series ever did.

 

[MusterX]

Scott Pilgrim is IMHO a very undervalued film, people tend to get turned off by the subject matter but to some degree Wright is poking fun at it plus you could argue its the ultimate example of his direction/editing style.

Scott Pilgrim is awesome. Its not getting the votes in this poll because most of us have probably already seen it multiple times.

 

[FrontNakedChoke]

Three way tie so far. I'm down to watch any of those three movies.

The other option is the only one I've seen and I hate it.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

I liked the Red Dragon novel. Got Silence of the Lambs sitting on the book shelf right this moment just waiting to be opened.

Here's the rub. The movie did such a great job with the adaptation that reading the book subsequently wasn't all that rewarding. Whereas if you watched Manhunter and then read Red Dragon you'd still get something out of the book with the different ending.

 

[europe1]

@sickc0d3r
@Scott Parker 27

It's still up in the air, you guys.

Not read it but I always kind of assumed that a lot of the philsopy/atmosphere was more unique to Tarkovskys film,

Yeah Tarkovsky piled on a lot of his own wazu-wazu in his filmatization. But I do think they synergize rather nicely. The Zone in the book is still this dangerous, unexplainable place where one has to rely more on some sort of intuitive dream-logic to read the lay of the land than conventional survival skills. There is still an outwordly element to the Zone, humans feeling a sort of soulful attraction to it. However -- Tarkovsky being Tarkovsky -- added this more religious, supernatural, reflection-of-the-soul aspects to the story. There is no point in the novel where they, say, take a rest near a lake and experience dreams where some child recites bible-passages.

In terms of meaning, the novel thematically is more about socioeconomic hardship and the sort of spiritual despondency that comes with it. You live your life in poverty, destitution, corruption and likewise conditions that blackens the soul and makes you lose faith in humanity. How does that affect you and what can you do about that?

Shit... that sound pretty much like the film now that I re-read that passage... uhh... ehmm... let's just say that the novel is a lot more non-religious and takes place mostly outside the Zone, okay? <45>

yet too different from the book for fans

I think it's more that the book-fans found the filmatization rather clunky with all the slimming down and exposition that was needed to be done -- and dare I say it, weird. There are so much that needs to be presented in that story, which is a lot easier to do in novel-form than film-form. Especially for such a serious story (in comparison to something like Star Wars)

But we live in a day where people have nerd-orgasms just to see something referenced, so maybe all those details wouldn't be viewed so unfavorably today.

 

[Guestx]

Three-way tie right now.

Interadesting.

 

[sickc0d3r]

Well I think we have a winner. Glad someone else was the tie breaker before I voted.

Here's my list, which is essentially every book I ever read and liked that was turned into a movie I saw and liked (hence no Battlefield Earth. I was so looking forward to that because I loved that book, and it crushed me how shitty it was).
I grew up reading mostly horror, sci-fi, and fantasy, so yeah, lots of Mr. King and some PKD here. Ranked in order of how well I liked both the book and the movie combined.

1. The Shawshank Redemption
2. Silence Of The Lambs
3. The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy
4. Bram Stoker's Dracula
5. The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo
6. Blade Runner (Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep)
7. Misery
8. Stand By Me (The Body)
9. Total Recall (We Can Remember It For You Wholesale)
10. The Shining
11. The Running Man
12. The Firm