Movies and books WAS :Re: What should we do next?

[dumbledore11214]

> Steve Van now,
> > 
> I couldn't disagree more. The movies are merely based on the books 
as stated in the credits of each movie. As for the books themselves, 
I have not read them, do not intend on reading them so I have no 
opinion of them whatsoever.
>

Alla:

Without the books movies would not have happened, period. I certainly 
respect your absolute right not to read the books, but movies are not 
merely based on the books, the books are **the basis** for the 
movies, no matter how much filmmakers would change the storylines, 
etc.

Moviemakers did not invent the characters and the main storyline, no? 
I suppose I am just taking an issue with the use of the word 
*merely*. Of course there are movies that dare to claim that they are 
based on the books and I wish filmakers would call them different 
names, because I think those adaptations are insult to the great 
books. "The seeker", anyone?

And I cannot forget poor Susan Cooper trying to say something good 
about the movie and failing sooo badly lol. And then I read her note 
on Netflix about that movie.

Anyways, just wanted to say that I enjoy the movies, but they  owe 
its existence to the 
books as any adaptation movies are. If filmmakers would have based 
the movies on the original screenplay, as hundreds of thousands 
movies are based, then sure I would agree that we should only analyse 
movies on their own merits.

JMO,

Alla