I agree Gofourmike. "Day of the Triffids", by John Wyndham was a well crafted science-fiction novel of the 1950s - but 'dated' by today's standards. So was Wyndham's The Midwich Cuckoos, in the film known as Village of the Damned (1960), with the sequel Children of the Damned (1964) Both movies failed to capture the essence of the book. Never saw the script. Even the second remake with Christopher Reeve (1995) was pretty weak, which had a solid budget and several top actors of the time. Granted, I do not have time to read or have access to scripts for every film made. But I would say there are more misses than hits.Day of the Triffids.
I read Ender's Game in the late 1980s, and the following continuation of the series by Orson Scott Card. All books dealt with human interaction with alien species as the human race expands human civilization into the stars. The books (while thought provoking on a several levels) Human & Alien traits in conflict & how it determined their culture(s), could not capture the essence of the reasoning of the mind(s). Film cannot capture 'thoughts', only audio & visual. If the writers, director and talent are really good, their audience can begin to see the story's character's 'minds at work'. You know, understand those wheels turning in the characters minds that establish in the audience what the characters may do 'next'. Let's define such as an advancement of the character's arc. Tough to do. The budget and talent within the film Ender's Game (2013), was topnotch. The visuals and acting were good. There is a big difference in an author's story telling. An author can take you into the psychology of mind(s) as well as character's arc(s) and a film's total production (with audio and visuals as seen by the screenwriter, director and production talent). While many factors overlap, they are different, each with their own limitations.Not a script, but Enders Game was an award--winning novel that was in development hell for over a decade, then, when it became a movie, it was a disappointment. The sequels to the novel, by the way, being Speaker to the Dead and Xenocide, had different tones to the original, but they were also excellent in their own way.
I did praise Steven Spielbergs remake of "War of the Worlds". He modernized the original story so it would reflect how society, in the present time, would react in the event of an alien takeover as seen through the eyes of Tom Cruise and his estranged family.I agree Gofourmike. "Day of the Triffids", by John Wyndham was a well crafted science-fiction novel of the 1950s - but 'dated' by today's standards. So was Wyndham's The Midwich Cuckoos, in the film known as Village of the Damned (1960), with the sequel Children of the Damned (1964) Both movies failed to capture the essence of the book. Never saw the script. Even the second remake with Christopher Reeve (1995) was pretty weak, which had a solid budget and several top actors of the time. Granted, I do not have time to read or have access to scripts for every film made. But I would say there are more misses than hits.
I believe a film is only as good as it's weakest link. AND there are a lot of links in telling a story in film. NO MATTER what the source is...
It is easier to praise movies that surpass their script or base novel (story) due to the passion and vision (and sometimes budget) of those that worked on the production. Examples of great films that surpass their source (using novels as an example) would be, Mario Puzo's Godfather 1 & 2, & Michael Crichton's Jurassic Park & Jaws, I would also add Harris's Silence of the Lambs. There are many more GREAT films. I have read the script for Alien & Aliens, the films were much better off the page & on the screen.
It is also a matter of taste, everyone is different and will have a different perspective. This is just mine, for better or for worse. Please take with a grain of salt...