has anyone read the book Thor that this movie was based off of? I am interested in reading it.
shareI've read Thor and it is FANTASTIC - MUCH better than this movie.
I'm very tempted to give you specifics about the book but want you to experience for yourself. Just trust me when I say that if they'd stayed true to the book when they did the movie it would have been MUCH better and much more interesting.
READ IT!
it's a definite page turner.
perfectly written from Thors point of view.
i haven't seen the movie yet (can't find a copy) but the book is certainly worth tracking down. it isn't a very long book, you could finish it in one sitting if you give yourself a few quiet hours alone.
Thor by Wayne Smith is a great book. I fully recommend it, not just if you're a horror fan but especially to anyone who's a dog owner.
share
Hi Realityfailure, if you want to rent the movie, you may want to try www.blockbuster.com. That's where i rented my copy (well, it did come on tv a few months ago and i watched a little of it. couldn't finish it, but got interested enough in it to want to rent it so i did an online rental). Good movie !
Thor is a minor classic.Very wel-written.
The movie was decent too.But the book blows it away.
The author should write a sequel in my opinion.
Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead.
I AM 13 YEARS OLD! I READ THE BOOK AND I LOVED IT! A LOT BETTER THAN THE MOVIE!
share13 years old and can read?? Amazing :)
VICTIMS AREN´T WE ALL?
The book's great for anyone who owns a dog or a werewolf, or is a werewolf for that matter. Both the book and the DVD are available through that amazing website named after the river/jungle/Wonder Woman's race of hot AMAZON chicks
shareI checked it out (Thor) from the library years ago. Just on a hunch. I really loved it. It's a sweet boy and his dog story with a werewolf twist. I'd actually like to buy a copy of it since I'm watching the inferior movie on cable.
Later in this post, someone comments that they're 13 years old. Someone later commenets about this young age for readers.
I read The Exorcist when I was 12. I started reading Edgar Alan Poe when I was 10.
And I read the Bible cover-to-cover while I was still in the womb. Would you like a cookie or something, chief?
shareBigPoppMerf said:
And I read the Bible cover-to-cover while I was still in the womb
I've had the book for years but am only just now got around to reading it. Don't know what took me so long! It's fantastic - told primarily from the dog's perspective, so well done. Highly recommended.
shareThe book is great. It is intelligent, interesting and best of all not overly long.
shareLove the book. Wish the movie had retained some elements of it, minus the werewolf design, as the one in movie is miles better than what is in the book.
shareWhat does the werewolf in the book look like? someone said it resembles the Wolfman with a flat face.
shareI think it must have been me who said it. Yes, he is more or less like the Wolfman only slightly better, able to convey to some extent human expressions. For example, the creature has this fiendish smile to unsettle the *Spoiler* husband when he climbs up the tree to escape its attacks, thereby suggesting its going to go after the family instead.
Yes the book has more family members by the way.
Werewolf is nearly always portrayed as a wolf head's on a man's body.
Does it say the wolf looks like Ted covered in fur or just simply a flat face?
No no, not at all like Ted. This is how the creature is described in the book:
"...two grotesquely long fangs that protruded from its mouth....its face though covered with fur, was human-shaped- it's mouth and nose were separate structures, not a snout"
"When he had seen the Bad Thing last night, the first thing he'd noticed was its puny, undoglike nose, no bigger than a human's..."
There's no more than that general detail. So fairly human faced, but Ted is not recognizable.
Sounds disappointing if all they describe is a furry human like face, not describing in detail on whether it has pointed ears? whether it's a four legged or two legged but we assume it's two legged or wearing shredd clothes.
shareO no, of course that is mentioned it stands on its hind legs and it tears off the tattered clothing when fully transformed, but as far as physical description is concerned: its really only bare bones info.
shareDoes it leave it up to the imagination to the reader whether it's like Lon Chaney chewbacca like look or Oliver Reed with the Batman like pointed ears near the top of the head?
shareSorry for the delay, just wanted to skim through the book to give you proper info. There is no clear indication of it. The book says it had human shaped head, and the only instance of ears being mentioned were when the husband throws a rock towards its head and ends up hitting "the pointed ear" tearing it. What I took from it is that it's very much the classic Wolfman look but only more vicious: I'd say the design of Wolfman in the remake is very much how the book describes the creature, just with even longer fangs.
shareThe movie did retain some elements. It was not an exact rendition, but considering how Hollywood has drastically altered some classic stories, I think were more faithful to "Thor" in "Bad Moon" than they are too many movies based on novels sadly. I think film makes it hard to convey the perspective of Thor also, like the written word can.
shareTrue. It'd be difficult to convey the point of view of the dog without inner monologue with voice over which would simply look strange and weird. So I like how they did it in the movie. In the book of course you can get away with it.
share