Buster wrote:Seems to me that Yeamon is an archetype - I agree that leaving him out seems very odd. Distributing his characteristics among the other roles seems like a recipe for confusion. Yeamon's place in Hunter's book is very specific and well defined, and I think I'll miss his character in the movie.
That said, it is a movie, and I suspect I'll like it for what it is, rather than being too concerned about how it strayed from the book. When I read, I read; when I watch a movie, I take it for the art form it is...
A movie is a movie and yes, it is a totally different art form from a book.
Having watched The Brave and having read the book upon which it was based, I know a huge amount of change was necessary to transform the book story from one form to the other. The vision of poverty stricken people sitting in an abandoned gas station eating a turkey would never have the same impact on screen as an extravagant carnival............it would have been so dismal as to be fatal to the film. (I really recommend you read the book!) In the book Raphael's children were very very young; in the book, they were old enough to be active part of the story. A literal portrayal of the book would have been a disaster.
But totally eliminating a key pivotal character seems extreme.
I don't know enough about the film industry. If a production company has the rights to a book, how much do they have to do with making the movie? Because a company Johnny owns is involved in making the movie happen, does it mean Johnny even has any idea how the movie is being made, or is it investment people just writing checks? In other words, does the presence of Johnny's production company really have anything to do with the integrity of the final product? Johnny, Hunter's friend, might see the film one way, but his production company that is providing money for filming might have a different set of goals/standards.