Absolutely horrible... - Along Came a Spider (2001) Discussion

[–] TheSadCafe79 18 years ago

I will have to agree with you completely...I'm in high school and I chose Along Came a Spider for a book report because I am a huge James Patterson fan. I had to read the book and then watch the movie and compare them. The book was absolutely amazing and the movie was terrible because it didn't come close to the book even Maggie Rose Dunne's name was different...Meghan Rose. And another thing, where was Sampson?

reply

[–] azbedwell 18 years ago

From what I can gather you both hate the film because it is not the same as the book. Well why don't you just accept the film as a film in itself then. I have to say I have not read the book but as a film in itself it is a perfectly acceptable thriller. There are plenty of films that are like this where the film is very loosly based on previous texts with only the concept and names changed.

Perhaps the writers/director/producers felt that the book would not have adapted on to film very well in its original format.

I do not think you shoudl get all pissy just because they changed so much.
If you have actual criticisms about the film then I have no problem with you saying so (by no means is it a perfect person) but just to say that the film is rubbish because it is not the SAME as the book is not a very constructive criticism.

At the end of the day those eho made the film would probably say that they did not want to make the film the same as the book and that it was made for the movie going audience not for all the James Patterson readers.

UP THE TOWN!

reply

[–] SuperMylo64 18 years ago

I watched the movie on TV last night and thought it was one of the worst films I've ever seen.

reply

[–] fantasyescapist 18 years ago

I've seen this film again on Channel 4(UK) and I think it's good. Yes. I haven't read the novel on which it's based, but I think it's quite an entertaining film.

'But the damn network wouldn't allow it!' - Schwartz Reports

reply

[–] Swifty49 18 years ago

The book was the first James Patterson I ever read and I couldn't put it down! I no longer read him, after reading virtually all his Alex Cross novels, because they are all now so "formula".

However they could have made a great movie out of this if if they had adapted the book and not just lifted a few names from it, and then miscast them. Sorry to get "pissy", but that's my opinion!

"Who are those guys?"

reply

[–] Maverick0120 18 years ago

I agree with the people who are disappointed in the movie. For those of you who haven't read the book, you should really consider checking it out to compare it to the movie -- the plot points that the movie decided to remove are SO big that in my opinion it really does only share the title and character names and very little else.

reply

[–] staceykrus 18 years ago

I understand where you are coming from saying that we should see the film as a film and nothing more. But, the problem stems from the fact that those of us who are James Patterson fans were extremely excited to see this movie in theaters...thinking of the possible sequels..twists...characters on screen. I accepted many of the changes but at one point I was so angry I spoke out loud in the theater...and it just so happens it was right when they shot Gary Soneji. I kept asking myself why would they do that...they could have atleast went on to a sequel. I can understand that they wouldn't want to do all four movies based on the four books that Gary Soneji was in but they could have atleast got two...and many of us avid fans would have still seen the sequel for the mere fact that it was based on a James Patterson book. And I agree to whoever said...Where is Sampson...they should cast him with Ernie Hudson.

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] josiebreen 18 years ago

Saw this on UK TV a few evenings ago and it was appalling. Morgan Freeman is a great actor but in this he just looked like he was just going through the motions to earn a quick buck. The female character was unbelievable too - Secret Service agent? Yeah, right. It was so lacklustre and predictable, I am amazed the people involved were able to get out of bed in the morning and drag themselves to the set - never mind how they raised the money for this dross in the first place.

reply

[–] suziebarlow 18 years ago

I completely disagree, i believe that Morgan Freeman was a great cast for the film and ebnthough i haven't read the book it was a great film.
A film which gets you thinking about who the leak and the bad guy is.

Along Came A Spider and Kiss The Girls are great films.

Just because they aren't based around the book doesn't mean they aren't goood.

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] sting_757 18 years ago

I agree don't try to compare movies and books. The book will always be better than the movie no matter what. If they tried to put everything in the movie the way it was in the book, it would be a long movie. Take the movie as it is, but don't stop admiring James Patterson and whoever said about Patterson Appalling the movie or whatever was there during the entire filming. And as far as I know he was pleased with the outcome. I mean what author wouldn't be seeing thier work getting made into movies. HA! People who never read the book will now and read the rest of the Cross novels. I will agree with this Morgan Freeman is a miscast he shouldn't be playing the role, I think the should pursue Denzel.

reply

[–] TinorialPeredhil 18 years ago

I am guilty of comparing books and movies. While I don't think I have ever heard any author criticize the way his book was made into film, I have to say that Along Came a Spider was, in my opinion, one of the worst adaptions of a book I have ever seen. I hate to say it, because I really hate saying taht something is that bad, but the entire plot was twisted. It's been a while since I've seen it, but didn't the movie turn Michael Goldberg into a Russian kid who does NOT get kidnapped? And Morgan Freeman is no Alex Cross. He's a great actor; I'll go to see his movies; he is not Alex.

It's good if people begin to read James Patterson because of the movie, but I was terribly disappointed when I saw it. In fact, I was told to leave to room several times because I got fed up (but I ended up sticking it out).

I'm really hoping Maximum Ride, if turned into a movie, will turn out a lot better. I think it will.

reply

[–] OpaqueOne 11 years ago

Many people are letdown by this film's inconsistencies with the book. I don't blame them, yet, these discrepencies between the novels and their motion pictures are nothing new. By virtue of the mediums' differences, it is difficult for screenwriters and filmmakers to seamlessly adapt book to script to movie.

Look at Dean Koontz's books turned films. Most of them are labled horrid by his readers. The only one which follows the book pretty well is the mini series Intensity. Why? Dean was an executive producer of the movie, and they also had 3 hours--as opposed to 1 1/2 to 2hours--to tell the story. He's expressed displeasure in all the other adaptations, but is said to be thrilled with Odd Thomas coming soon.

Steven King's books have also been largely raped when turned from book to film.Many of his films get nearly as much flack as Koontz's...maybe not quite as much. Again, only a small number of his films are truly accurate when viewed. He is said to enjoy Frank Darabont's adaptations best (Green Mile, Shawshank, etc)and sometimes writes directly for the screen.

Heck, even Tom Tryon's The Other isn't 100% like the book, and he WROTE the novel AND screenplay.

I'm not sure how Patterson sees these films (this one and Kiss the Girls) but keep in mind unless an author is involved with the filmmaking, they have little say in the final product. The film rights they sell give them many reasons to be happy. To sell something, reap the rewards, and then complain about the end-product isn't cool.

Although I will say ACAS and KTG are amazing cinema compared to that Alex Cross film with Perry.

reply

[–] ScottNichols 8 years ago

He's expressed displeasure in all the other adaptations, but is said to be thrilled with Odd Thomas coming soon.

Understandable, for sure. I think the Odd Thomas movie is superb in every respect.

Actors do not have a job...they have a blast!

reply

[–] almiland 18 years ago

I too thought this movie was absolutely horrible. The problem is that Along Came a Spider is the book that first tells us what the character of Alex Cross is supposed to look, act, be like. This is where everyone realizes that Alex Cross needs to be played by a younger man. However, this movie did not get made until AFTER Morgan Freeman was cast as Alex Cross in Kiss the Girls. When it came time to make the movie ACAS, they probably realized that they made a huge mistake and would have to completely revamp the movie. They had to do this because there is just no way of having Morgan Freeman and Monica Potter portray the true relationship they have in the book on screen. This is a huge example of why Hollywood needs to realize that book series should never be made into movies out of order! Hello!

reply

[–] TinorialPeredhil 18 years ago

Yeah but half of the things in the movie that were changed have nothing to do with Alex (my two biggest: Soneji and Shrimpie)

But I did NOT know that Kiss the Girls was made before ACAS. Thanks. Now I know to stay far away from that movie as well.

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] BarryFrom 18 years ago

You don't have to have read the book, or compare them to know that this film is utter trash. It has absolutely NOTHING distinguishing it from any other crime thriller of the past 20 years.

Appalling

reply

[–] ScottNichols 8 years ago

It has absolutely NOTHING distinguishing it from any other crime thriller of the past 20 years.

Why does it have to? Movies are entertainment. I found this movie very entertaining.

I disagree. It's NOT utter trash at all.

Actors do not have a job...they have a blast!

reply

[–] theB9er 18 years ago

If this was one of the worst movies youve ever seen .I guess you havent seen very many movies

reply

[–] po243903 18 years ago

this movie wasnt as bad as people seem to think, sure they changed a lot of things but thats holloywood what ya gonna do, but after reading many of pattersons books i definately see morgan freeman as alex cross, i could give a $hit about the age difference, alex cross is portrayed as a loving father who tells some jokes every now and then in the books and thats almost exactly how morgan freeman does all his characters, the older wiser guy with the great witty comments

reply

[–] friccknfracck 18 years ago

Note:: BOOK SPOILERS BELOW

Well, I am also a fan of the book series. And there are many differences here. Some are silly and seem like they didn't need to be changed. Then some did have be in there. For example, why make this one a sequel at all? This all happened before Kiss the Girls. Big deal? Nah, but it was kind of silly to do all that.

Now that being said, the MAIN problem with the movie is that they jumbled about 4 books into one movie. Which meant there is alot of stuff that just doesn't seem to add up so well. However, this was kinda necessary. The actual book spanned a period of more than a year. It had too much stuff going on to fit it all in a book. Furthermore, the character of Soneji did not even die in Along came a spider. He was in Cat and Mouse.

If they wanted to follow the book, they would have to put all of this into 120-180 minutes worth of film at most.

::Kidnapping of the TWO kids.
::The dead end investigation.
::The body of one of the kids being found (dead kids don't do so well for movie audiences either. Especially ones that are raped.)
::The ransom drop at disneyworld, and the plane ride to the island (think it was Jamaica)
::The relationship between Jezzie and Alex developing
::The investigation into the project murders, which eventually gets linked to Soneji by his car being seen by a member of the community.
::Then they would have to raid him and he escapes, followed by a massive manhunt for Soneji.
::Shootout in Mcdonalds that leads to Soneji's capture
::The sessions where Soneji reveals that he has split personality
::Cross hypnotizing him to talk to the murderer and trying to find the girl
::The court Case and Soneji convincing the country that he is not the killer, his split personality is
::The realization that Soneji never asked for a ransom because all he wanted was to be famous.
::The investigation into the 2 secret service agents.
::The realization that Jezzie was involved, and she got close to him to use him, as well as manipulate him to get the ransom
::The escape of Soneji
::The murder of One of the agents by Soneji
::Alex tricking Jezzie into admitting to the crimes
::Soneji attacking Cross at his house, followed by the scene outside where he gets hostages and gets shot and caught
::The other agent giving the kid's location before he is executed, and the trip to another country to get her
::Jezzies execution where Cross returns to his car and finds a note from Soneji, indicating that he again has someone on the inside working for him, and that he would one day escape again.

Definitely too much to put into one movie. I think they did ok at modifying the script and working with the amount of time they had alotted for the film.

reply

[–] thedevilhasmysocks 18 years ago

In general i thought this film was crap, which is a shame because as it is supposed to be based on the book by James Patterson, if they had stuck to the plots in the book it would've been a much better film.

Smithers: "Well, it is Christmas today, sir".
Burns: "I say when it's Christmas".

reply

[–] TinorialPeredhil 18 years ago

I see what you mean. I have heard it before. I would agree with it if I weren't so stubborn, but I am NOT stubborn enough to totally disregard the facts. However, the changes they made were not acceptable to me. I don't think that many of them were necessary. I also am one of those people who thinks that four hour movies would please fans better than crap hour and a half movies. Harry Potter would do better if released in two parts. I can't see why they would do that to JP's book-- and JP himself said that he didn't care for the movies. One can sympathize.

The writers did okay, but okay just isn't good enough when converting a #1 Bestseller into a movie. I'm sorry; that sounds callous and no, I probably would NOT do a better job. So, unless I had a manuscript and movie I loved, I would probably not take the job. I know, it's all easy to say, but I won't know unless I am ever in that position. Point being: The writers were okay. A stand-alone movie like this may have made it in Hollywood. It's risky and dangerous converting a book into a movie, and, as said above, if you don't have a spectacular script, fans are going to bash you, worse than other movies, because they have the book on your side. Making movies is, in general, mixed. People hate you; people love you.

*yawn* I'm exhausted. I ramble.

reply

[–] are_you_in 18 years ago

I wasnt aware this was based on a novel but it was very mediocre. I was surprised by the twist in all honesty, but it was still very by the numbers type thriller. You'd think Morgan wouldnt be in something so lame

Racism is the new black

reply

[–] boythatpoursdrinks 18 years ago

Thanks friccknfracck, that reminds me why I enjoyed the book and why I disliked the film so much.

Casting was poor.

The best parts of the book (i.e. Cross and Soneji's head-to-heads, the split personality, the court case and Cross & Flannigan's relationship) were ommitted entirely when they could have made the film a tense psychological thriller instead of a glorified chase with a pointless twist at the end which you don't really care about.

***I'm not even putting the books or films in the same league, ok?***
but:

Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings didn't try to do a large book in one film, neither should the makers of this.

"Fight Club" and "Fear and Lothing..." are the only other two films I can think of that do the books justice, and they're both short books...

reply

[–] miss-molly 18 years ago

OK so I am slightly off topic but I hope you dont mind, I have recently read my first James Patterson novel after people telling me what a great writer he is.

But I must be honest I was a bit disappointed with the book that I read, it's called "London Bridges". So my question is, if I were to read another James Patterson book, which one should I go for? My friend (who love JP) says that it was pretty poor in comparison to his other books, so any help would be appreciated.

It seems to me that, aside from being a little mentally ill, she's pretty normal.

reply

[–] anyOneHomeMcFly 17 years ago

This may seem like an odd answer, but if u r talking Alex cross novels i would suggest along came a spider. As the 1st, there is foundations laid that will enhance cat and mouse and certainly pop goes the weasel.

I tend to agree with u london bridges wasn't one of his stronger efforts. I will also reccomend 2 other novels that arent part of the Alex Cross universe. When the Wind Blows and The Jester.

"If u had 3 wishes, what would they be. Would u change yourself or would u try and change me"

reply

[–] Peter34 17 years ago

I don't get why so many people hate this movie, it was pretty good.

reply

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ScottNichols 8 years ago

I think so, too.

Actors do not have a job...they have a blast!

reply

[–] cassiesweddings 17 years ago

I agree with you I have just recently brought all the cross novels and I noticed that there were films made out of along came a spider and kiss the girls (a morgan freeman box set) they were only £10 which was lucky because I was totally disapointed with along came a spider.

What I don't understand is at the end they kill Soneji but in the book he gets sent to prison. At the end of kiss the girls we are informed that he has broken out of prison I guess he is going to be metioned in Jack and Jill which I have not started yet.

There is no mention in the film about his dead wife, Sampson, his children or his mum, which all play a very big part in crosses life.

Why was the love affair with Jessie not played out in the film.

I think the film was hard to follow for the people that may have not have read the book, my husband hated it but won't read the book.

I think they missed out on alot of important ingrediants that make the book so good.

I also want to point out that Along came a spider is the first book and Kiss the girls is that second why did they change the film orders?

reply