I saw the movie twice actually, cause both of my friends wanted to see it with me but it was at different times!I like the books more, for obvious reasons that people should know.But I also liked the movie, I just don't like the movie if you base it off the books.But if you just look at the movie itself and pretend it's not from a book, it's pretty decent!11/9/2009 #1
I saw it i loved it I hope they put it on DVD so yea and i love how they casted Evra..hehe and i have a question theres no monkeygirl in the books right? my friend said there isnt is she a replacement for Debbie? confunsed here someone please let me know?11/19/2009 #2
Evra isn't how I pictured him to be, but he made me laugh.And you're friend is right that there isn't a monkey girl in the books.Since I think they are only going to be making the one movie I believe they used her as a replacement for Debbie.11/19/2009 #3
The movie was good, it was really funny, but they missed out some of the best parts of the First three books. Like when Sam died/when Darren first properly sucks the blood out of some one. The movie got me to read the books though because I was a little scared of them at first, the covers freaked me out and the author has a reputation for horror, I know that they are horror books but they had a sought of magical quality to them... if your not a fan of horror books then you will understand what I mean when/if you read the Darren Shan Saga, if you haven't read them, do so immediatly unless you have a massive aversion to books, but if you have an aversion to books then why would you be on this site... I've rambled... sorry.1/19/2010 #4
yh i was kinda disappointed about it myself actually. same reasons as you mate. why leave out them? and they were nothing like i expected them to be (the characters), but thats just my imagination, i guess. and monkey girl- what the hell??! although if she was a bit older... she would've been fit... :D7/29/2010 #5
I might get it for my B-day the totaly skrud it up9/20/2011 #6
If you just look at it as a stand alone film then, I guess, it would be okay, but you can'tjustlook at it as a film.
Okay, it is onlybasedon a book, so I understand that things don't have to match up perfectly (I've actually been arguing that very point on another book-to-film adaptation, so I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't allow for it) but they should at least get the character's personalities right. They are created a certain way for reasons and you can't just go changing someone like Gavner to suddenly be prim and proper with a ridiculous moustache! And what happened to Mr Crepsley? Not only was heneverin a relationship with Truska, but his pattern of speech is completely wrong. On numerous occasions he uses contractions like 'don't', 'won't' and 'can't' and he says 'Bull' (short for Bulls**t) which is a term he wouldneveruse. They almost seem to have got his and Gavner's personalities mixed up!
Evra isn't hostile to Darren, like he is in the beginning of the film, and doesn't play an instrument. Rebecca just annoys me! (It's almost like they're trying to use her to substitute for both Debbie and Sam) Mr Tinyneversupported the vampaneze, he was neutral in the war. In fact, the only character that seemed to stay true to the book was Mr Tall! They removed Sam and, therefore, Sam's death, so one of the defining moments of Darren's life as a vampire never happened - instead it's changed to a scene in which Darren drinks from someone (who lives) who's half monkey, which is one of the animals vampires can't drink from. Not to mention, a MASSIVE spoiler for book 8(?) is in there, making Steve revealing himself as a vampaneze far less of a shock.
So, in short, I think the film was terrible and a waste of the money it cost to buy the DVD.10/26/2011 . Edited 10/26/2011 #7
I understand that this is your opinion and all but in truth I disagree.
Firstly I do agree with what you said about it being based on the book. I believe that also it may have worked for the best as the majority of Darren Shans readers are between the ages of 9 and 14 (This is a rough statistic) so if they made it dark and serious like the books it would have an even lower rating as the majority of fans wouldn't even beable to see it.
Yes I agree they shouldn't have left out those characters but look at it from a producers point of view. Movies are made to be shortish in length as I belive people would not like to be sitting for 3 hours straight in a cinema. I like the way they have made it unique yet still following the main plot of the books. It showed a diffent view of the story and it provided fans with a visual of the story, not book as it was based on it.
Sorry about that little rant. :)
as i watched the movie before i read the books, i actualy like both. but as stand alones, not together. its actualy made a very important discovery for me: its not as dissapointing to read book-to-films if you watch it first. who knew? --but after reading the books, i can't watch the movie without being annoyed, so i simply remember it as the good movie i thought it was when i first saw it.--as a bit of a rant, they did mess up A LOT of important things from the books. like the powers. half-vamps can't flit OR use healing spit. that's just wrong! the turning scene was dissapointing too. it didn't show ANY of crepsley's softer side or his slight hesitance to break the laws as he shows in the series. gavner was just plain weird and with the switch in personality that someone previous mentioned earlier. i think that if someone is going to go through the trouble of making a movie from a book, however great it is alone, they should at least have the decency to make the characters right--did anyone else get really annoyed by the fact that Cormac Limbs was a GIRL?? whats up with that madness??2/1/2012 #9
|Forum Moderators: x.x.Beth C.x.x|
|Membership Length: 2+ years 1 year 6+ months 1 month 2+ weeks new member|