I finished reading the book today. I put the movie on and...uh...Tracie? Okay. Where's Sampson? What about the Sanderses? Whatever. Then I see a boy, named Dimitri? Who the heck is that? Okay...Megan Rose??? This is about Maggie Rose Dunn and Shrimpie Goldberg. Not Megan Anne Rose. I shut the movie off after 15 minutes. I'll go read another book before I watch a terrible adaptation of a book.
share[deleted]
I totally agree! I just finished the book and started watching the movie...and although I know most movie adaptations are usually loosely based on the book, this one was so far off that I didn't even get half way.
shareI've been reading Alex Cross books... I'm on the 6th one. I never even knew they made movies of them until recently. I don't even want to watch the movies even though I love the books. The plots are so different, and why is Along Came a Spider after Kiss the Girls? ACaS was the first book... and I Was watching the trailer for ACaS, and they pronounced Soneji wrong UGHHH they say it like Sawn-gy, but it's suposed to be So-nee-ji. It even says in the book
but maybe I should try the movies, but I'm going to hate it because it won't be like the book.
Save the cheerleader, save the world.
Kiss the Girls is good. This movie is an abortion.
--
Once upon a time, we had a love affair with fire.
http://athinkersblog.com/
I agree 100%. I got as far as the awful kidnapping scene in the office and had to turn off the TV; I could not bear another minute of that mess. Heck, did Marc Moss (the screenwriter) even read the book, or did he just use CliffsNotes?
~
"An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind."
-Mahatma Gandhi
I think he used the CliffsNotes and probably didn't even give the book a fair chance.
this is the problem with novels been turned into books, they always SUCK. That's why I decided to read the books first before watching the movies.
I think that for these type of films they should always make a 2 part film. The novel gave enough or even more than enough material for 2 films. They should also try to stick with the facts about the characters and not try to change them like they did here.
First of all Alex Cross is in his late 30s not in his 50s. He also has two kids and a grandmother that live with him. His cool partner, Sampson, I don't think he was in the film. There were two kids kidnapped not one.
In the first film they could have ended it with the part where they have Gary put in jail. Then for the sequel, still without knowing where the little girl is at, they could have based it on Gary's escape from the mental hospital and on rescuing the little girl. everything in between is their job to make it interesting and work.
>>this is the problem with novels been turned into books, they always SUCK
So are you a total idiot? A huge number of award winning and critically acclaimed screenplays have come from novels. It's a main source of stories for movies.
You could not be more wrong.
I saw the movie before I read the book and in all honesty, if you didn't read the book, the movie is pretty decent. Now, having read the book afterwards, I was like, "What the crap? The book is so much better than the movie. Why is the movie so crappy?"
--
http://www.mercuryband.com
http://www.spoutmusic.com
damn i m ust be on the international book database....let me see, o, no its imdb, hmm thats *beep* IDIOTS
"I live on both sides of the fence, so the grass is always green"-Sir Ben Kingsley
I think its pathetic that you resort to name calling for one, and contribute to a discussion page without having expressed any opinions.
Apparently no one has the right to express opinions according to you. Also, evidently, you believe there is clearly very definitely set boundaries between different story telling media.
The problem with this film is that it is based poorly on a book (being based on a book ==> people WILL discuss the BOOK as well!). The books are heavily dependent upon the psychological nature of its killers and criminals and there is no depth to the films.
They are hideously naive and childish, whether you have read the book or not! They utterly miss the sophistication and intelligence of the books.
My biggest problem was the casting of Cross and Sampson. I dont know if anyone else agrees but i always saw them as younger more physically able people.
So to wrap up: If mack212385 is that scared of books, don't *beep* comment. Grow up and p**s off!
The trouble is - are there any film adaptations that are ever as good as the books? I can't think of many or any really. I'll have to get the books one day and give them a read :)
shareNo Country For Old Men-Word for word, scene for scene, of what's in the book.
Lord of the Rings
Another Oscar winning adaption.
Star Wars (books were published after movie, written before)
Memento
Anyway, yeah Along Came a Spider was a disgrace, I actually read the book right before the movie got released. Talk about taking liberties with the characters. Almost as bad as some of the 70s-80s-90s comic adaptions.
I love Morgan Freeman, I think he has what it takes to play Alex Cross, but he is too old. He needed to be 10-20 years younger and have some muscle on him.
I always imagined Alex Cross as kindof a *in Eddie Murphy voice* Wesley Snipes-type. Not necessarily Wesley Snipes himself, but a Wesley Snipes-type.
Although Wesley Snipes really is IMO the perfect Alex Cross. He has the acting-chops, if there was good direction and dedication to the material he would own the role.
I can't express how good it is to hear someone as sensible as you!
Not all adaptations are bad, and the one's that are, have varying degrees of ghastliness. The Patterson thrillers were raped by those films.
And yes, everyone knows Morgan Freeman is amazing, but he's not suited for every role. Alex Cross is younger, fitter and more street smart and where the hell is "Man Mountain" Sampson? I remember getting a glimpse of a fat useless cameo for this sidekick, what the hell!?
I think directors need to stop remaking good films and start trying to correct the ones that had good ideas but poor execution. The best place to start would be Along Came a Spider!
Will Smith - Alex Cross
Jamie Fox - Sampson
Both guys are about 40 now so perfect age to play these characters.
Soneji I picture as Gary Oldman like he was as Stansfield in Leon
and start from there
Along Came a Spider could have been a superb film on par with Silence of the Lambs (Soneji reminded me of Hannibal, he was always one step ahead and could have been a great screen villain)
Now I can't read a Cross book without picturing Morgan Freeman which is annoying me to no end. Although I think the guys is brilliant it's always better to let your mind picture him.
I definitely think they should re-make this movie since it could be a real classic thriller.
By the way How does Kiss the Girls stand up as a movie compared to the book?
I pictured Michael Clarke Duncan as Sampson.
shareAlex Cross = Denzel Washington (the original choice in "Kiss the Girls"
John Sampson = Ving Rhames
These are the actors I hear and see when I read the books (I just started "Cat & Mouse")
"Oh Benson, dear Benson, you are so mercifully free of the ravages of intelligence."
Alex Cross = Denzel Washington (the original choice in "Kiss the Girls"OK, I know you posted nearly 6 years ago but I just wanted to say that those are the two people I imagine when I read the books! share
John Sampson = Ving Rhames
These are the actors I hear and see when I read the books (I just started "Cat & Mouse")
Totally picture Will Smith as Alex Cross. That's the first person who came to mind while I was reading this book.
As for Sampson I kept thinking that LL Cool J would be perfect.
I think Liev Schreiber would have made a good Gary Soneji. Just seems like he would be good with the split personality stuff.
It's a myth about Star Wars. George Lucas wrote a treatment called Star Wars that covered the entire saga. You can find it online. However, he focused on what became episode 4. Alan Foster Dean wrote the novelization of the first movie under George Lucas's name. He later wrote a sequel, called Splinter of a Mind's Eye, before Empire came out.
Memento was a short story that was published AFTER the movie came out.
LOTR, as much as I loved it, was not a scene-for-scene adaptation. It was so massive that many things were left out (thankfully), and several things condensed and changed.
Now, Kiss the Girls was a good adaptation. Their choice to make it the first movie, I don't know, but look at the James Bond franchise. Instead of making Casino Royale first, thay made Dr. No then From Russia With Love. The worst offense with Along Came a Spider is that, were they to make Cat and Mouse into a movie, it relies so HEAVILY upon ACAS that it would be a shell of the source material because of how the movie ended.
--
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
jonbkennedy.wordpress.com
Star Wars (books were published after movie, written before)Those were novelizations of the movies. The first book was novelized by Lucas himself. Empire was written by Donald F. Glut, Jedi by James Kahn. Now, if you want to discuss the Prequels, those were written by Terry Brooks, R.A. Salvatore, and Matthew Stover--all based on the screenplays.
I HATED this movie!! I am a huge fan of Patterson's work and it seems his books are covered by the same person that does Stephen King's book based movies. I have learned to never watch a movie after I read the book. It just p!sses me off and I spend the entire time counting the inconsistencies lol. I realize the movies aren't going to be EXACTLY like the books, but it would be nice, if a movie was made, it would at least stay TRUE to it. I do believe they did a good job of picking Freeman as Cross, but that is about where it ends. I am re-reading ACaS now and came to the page to remember what it was I didn't like about the movie. Just looking at the synopsis and the character list reminded me of why this movie stunk, bit, blew--you pick your word. It just seems that some books need a)better directors/producers b)somebody to take on the movie that actually READ the book or c)no movie made. Very few movies based on books don't turn out to be half as good as the books. I have found very few exceptions to this rule. This is one of the reasons I wish King would stop selling his stuff to Hollywood, with the exception of Shawshank and the Green Mile, his books have been annihilated on the big screen.
To the person that b!tched about people commenting the book--yes it is the movie database but first and foremost, these boards are people sharing their thoughts and opinions about the movies, and in some cases the books the movies were based on. Name calling and attacks just makes you look a little kid with low intelligence. If you don't like it, don't comment--just go away.
Have a good day, folks! :-)
I have read the book and have the DVD as well i know what people are saying but come on all books that get adapted for DVD or the big screen there will always be stuff that gets changed ie names and such it happend with the green mile and it will always happen in the future and they do try to keep to the books but yet it isnt always possible if you watch "kiss the girls" sampson is in that one and keeps more to the book so realy its down to the person if they like the film or not cause i did.
see you on the flip side
I'm so glad I'm "thinly read"
I really liked the film and hadn't read the book or even heard about it before seeing the film.
Of couse people who know the plot and twist are gonna find the film a let down. They're not gonna get the surprised that they got in the book (if indeed the twist is the same) second time round.
Also, your imagination makes for a budget the directors can't afford so of course the film will pale in comparison on almost every occasion.
I really don't understand folk getting uppity about books not being match on the big screen.
I think the issue others, and myself having just seen this for the first time tonight (I've been putting it off as I've heard nothing but bad things) is the fact that they didn't really pay any attention to the source material at all.
Alex Cross is described as a physically fit, 6 foot 4 or so Mohammed Ali look-a-like who's late 30s in these books.
What did we get? A guy who's like 50 & can barely run. Sure, Freeman is awesome, but he isn't Alex Cross awesome. Will Smith on the other hand is the PERFECT actor for Alex Cross, hands down.
and that doesn't even begin to touch what else they screwed up. But when you can't even get the main character right, you're off to a bloody awful start.
After a century of instant gratification, I found self-discipline… challenging.
Will Smith definitely would've been perfect for Alex Cross, and maybe Denzel Washington as Sampson.
Anyway, I'm aware some things from books aren't included in the film adaption because of time constraints, but some of the changes made in this were just pointless. Hardly any Sampson, the entire beginning was changed, "Shrimpie Goldburg" was replaced with some russian kid, some people's names were changed, just the entire film is one huge WTF.
And the removal of Gary Soneji/Murphy's split personality disorder! That was one of my favorite parts of the book! And I definitely found it one of the biggest contributions to it being an interesting and unique storyline.
The only thing I think this movie did right was Jezzie Flannigan. She looked pretty much exactly like how I had imagined.
I'm Tom Hanks and I want you in my bed.
i think this movie is the most stupid movie in history, are you sure that the book is smarter? is it the script writer's fault? i can't believe it.
i mostly will not be able to answer your reply, since marissa mayer hacked my email, no notification