I bet P.D. James isn't a Pink Floyd fan

[threemonkeys]

How many times do you watch a movie and say "wow that it so much better than the book"? For a variety of reasons, it just isn't something you hear very often. Children of Men, the movie, is so much better than the book. There, I said it.

Comments

[cat-i-th-adage.livejournal.com]

By that do you mean:

'This movie is worth watching'

or:

'That book was so trashy anything would be better'?

Possibly you mean both, but my effective interest is in the watchability of the audio-visual version.

[threemonkeys.livejournal.com]

The film is well worth watching - the film makers have done not only a good job of adapting the book to the screen but they have also brought something more to the setting and subtext to make it a lot more relevant.

I wouldn't personally describe the book as "trashy" but even as a big PD James fan I didn't think it was all that good either - a typical example of an author "slumming" it in another genre and not really getting it.

[littenz.livejournal.com]

The film was audio-visually rich.
I was pleased that the British made this a movie and not the Americans. The Hollywood treatment would have bowlderised the story.

After the film I had an interesting conversation with my girlfriend about why the world (in the film) had gone to pot.

[I've been in a internet-free environment for two weeks, hence the late post.]