Adaptation Quality Quotes

I increasingly fear that nothing good can come of almost any adaptation, and obviously that's sweeping. There are a couple of adaptations that are perhaps as good or better than the original work. But the vast majority of them are pointless.

The only good Philip K. Dick film is 'Total Recall.' It's faithful to the book. Arnie gets it.

It's terrible for people when they really love a book and there's an adaptation and they don't like it, because it's almost like you have this personal connection to the original material.

For me, the reason to make the movie is that if people like the comic, then people would like the movie if it was well made. There are good movies for them, but very few. And I mean that in a true sense. If they love your story for freaking 30 years, then they can do a movie about it.

When answering questions over the years about film and TV adaptations of my books, I have always maintained that no movie or TV series could ever change or damage my work.

When you're making an adaptation, you have to make content for the fans; otherwise, you'll get something that won't even be accepted by the mainstream. You want to make something that the fans will approve and the mainstream will enjoy.

Awful film adaptations follow novelists for the rest of their lives. An atrocious movie of 'We Need to Talk About Kevin' could have stigmatised the book, aggrieved the novel's fans, and blighted my reputation forever.

The movie adaptations of stage musicals that I've seen, without exception, in my opinion don't work. A lot of people would disagree with me.

There are many books that I love dearly, and I've seen many televised or film recreations that I just haven't thought were up to scratch.

If it's a good work of adaptation, the book should remain a book and the film should remain a film, and you should not necessarily read the book to see the film. If you do need that, then that means that it's a failure. That is what I think.

Oftentimes when you see adaptations of books you like, you're let down. As an author, you assume that they are going to suck. A little bit of hope is dangerous.

I adore book-to-film adaptations when they're done well, and I'm more lenient than many readers when it comes to what counts as 'done well.' For me, the most important thing is that the film maintains the spirit of the original book.

My main point about films is that I don't like the adaptation process, and I particularly don't like the modern way of comic book-film adaptations, where, essentially, the central characters are just franchises that can be worked endlessly to no apparent point.

Most adaptations of plays I hate, because they don't envision something as cinema at all, you know?

Some writers get snooty about what happens when their books are adapted to film, but I don't feel that way.

I think the hardcore fans can expect exactly what both 'The Hunger Games' and 'Catching Fire' delivered: 'Mockingjay' is going to be as faithful a rendition of Suzanne's Collins's world and books and characters as we can put out!

All you can hope for when you get a book adapted for TV is that you get a good actor and not some muppet off 'EastEnders.'

'Rob Roy' was a great adaptation. It was a lot better than 'Braveheart.'