New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Yes, that's right, folks. It's another week of the A-List where I'm in one of my negative moods. In this case, the Debbie Downer syndrome is brought on by some healthy skepticism, though, so my heart's in the right place. The skepticism comes from this week's anticipated release of Where The Wild Things Are, directed by Spike Jonze from the famous children's book by Maurice Sendak. Jonze is a great director, the book is a classic, the cast is intriguing, and the previews are hair-raisingly good (if such a thing is possible). So why am I skeptical? Because Where The Wild Things Are is not only a revered classic, but the book is also very, very short. Like, ten sentences short. How do you turn a ten-sentence story into a full-length movie?

Hence the skepticism. Moreover, I get worried because, as you will see from the list below, there have been many movies in the last few years made from short books; most of these movies are not only bad in concept, but bad in every way possible. Unforunately, one of those films' stars, Jim Carrey, is looking like he's going to headline another potential clunker, an adaptation of A Christmas Carol where Scrooge is, at one point, shrunk down to the size of a mouse; you remember that scene in Charles Dickens' novel, right? No. Of course you don't. It's not in the novel. Doesn't mean Robert Zemeckis, that film's writer-director, won't add in the scene randomly, and—

Oh, right, the topic. Sorry for the tangent. My point, though, is that some adaptations of books are bad all the way around. Two sets of this list's entries feature one major similarity; though money was made on both films, their quality is lacking. Not all of these movies are the worst of their genre; though I am skeptical but looking forward to Where The Wild Things Are, for example, I'd be shocked if it's out-and-out bad. Still, these movies are based on great books, so their lack of goodness is just more disappointing and more painful to take. Let's take a wincingly nostalgic look down memory lane, shall we?

Jumanji

Oh, what a good, good book. What a bad, bad movie. Granted, Jumanji, the 1995 adventure movie about a jungle-themed board game that comes to life with wild results, has some interesting sections, and the special effects aren't all bad. Considering that the film's director, Joe Johnston, has a background in such technology, they ought to be good. However, the main plot, which is completely different from the book by Chris Van Allsburg, is silly at best and overwrought at worst. One unlucky player is sucked into the titular game for over 25 years until a pair of siblings let him out while playing their own game. Lucky for us, he comes out looking like a bearded Robin Williams! Oh, did I say "lucky"? I meant the opposite of lucky. Yeah, Williams is more subdued here than in other mid-1990s films, but his constant freakout at the game never sells.

Continued:       1       2       3