1 line
1.6 KiB
Plaintext
1 line
1.6 KiB
Plaintext
very bad adaptation of a very good book. the lady who wrote the book (Thea Beckman) said she did not like this movie and i can only agree.<br /><br />in the book Dolf is a strong person who tries to do sensible things given that he is stranded in the middle ages. in the movie he's a totally uninteresting whiny little brad, mostly concerned with his own superiority over these primitive people.<br /><br />in the book he eventually resigns himself to being stuck in the middle-ages for the rest of his life, in the movie it is clear all the time he will be rescued, taking away all tension (and i just want to forget about the ultra-clichéd Hollywood-style 'he has to take a pill every day and only has like 5 pills') <br /><br />In the book Dolf makes friends with some of the people he meets. in the movie the only person of interest is some girl with the brains of a peanut. (it's a kid's movie dammit, which pedophile ever thought they really needed to cram some romance in it?)<br /><br />in the book he goes back in time out of scientific curiosity, in the movie it's because he can't handle loosing some stupid socker game.<br /><br />in the book he gets things done with his intelligence, being a leader because he has earned the respect of his comrades, in the movie: no intelligence, no hard earned respect.<br /><br />I liked almost all of Thea Beckman's books and if this is the way the movie-industry treats them i just hope the rest of her stories will be kept of the screen and in the hands of people who do not feel like reading a book once in a while is to much of an effort. |