QUOTE ("Chaosmaster8753":186ab7j4)
QUOTE ("VladYvhv":186ab7j4)
Friday the 13th (2009): A. Great adaptation of the first 3 movies, with some real thought put into it, as we're dealing with pre-zombie Jason. Also, some nifty nods to the original. But, I'm not fond of sex in movies, so that drags it down from the A+ potential. I do like it better than the original, because we aren't dealing with a crazy old woman.
What makes this better than the original Friday the 13th?
While the origional's still watchable, it's easily the weakest of the series. Of course, it was also just made to be a "potboiler" movie and suffers a bit from that. I think it's better to have Jason, instead of his mother, running around killing people.
QUOTE ("kibaspirit":186ab7j4)
My Sister's Keeper F
Seriously. It was nothing like the book! They added a bunch of shit to the main plot, that never happened in the book. They also made a very small, two page story about the main character, take up like half of the movie!
I know that movies can't be super long, but the only reason this one was made, was because the book was so dang popular!
I mean really. How could they have fucked it up that bad?
Seriously. It was nothing like the book! They added a bunch of shit to the main plot, that never happened in the book. They also made a very small, two page story about the main character, take up like half of the movie!
I know that movies can't be super long, but the only reason this one was made, was because the book was so dang popular!
I mean really. How could they have fucked it up that bad?
It's what they do. Try comparing a lot of movies based on Stephen King's works to the movies based on them. Christine (John Carpenter) and Maximum Overdrive (King, himself) are the most faithful ones, but even they change some things, because what works on paper may not always work on film. Whoever made the Needful Things movie should be run over by a burning '58 Plymouth Fury... The Running Man is also guilty of this, but is actually a perty good movie.
