Boulle, Planet of the Apes

Patito de Hule

Ad Honorem
Jan 2009
3,333
Minneapolis, MN
When I saw that movie, I didn't realize it was based on a book. I loved the movie, but hated all of the sequels (which my wife has followed). I was in for a surprise when I found out it was a book and read that. Probably around 1970-71.

But I didn't know at the time it was by the same author who made the bwidge on the wiver cwy.
 

okamido

Forum Staff
Jun 2009
29,885
land of Califia
When I saw that movie, I didn't realize it was based on a book. I loved the movie, but hated all of the sequels (which my wife has followed). I was in for a surprise when I found out it was a book and read that. Probably around 1970-71.

But I didn't know at the time it was by the same author who made the bwidge on the wiver cwy.
I first read the book in High School. I had to force myself to finish it when I realized it was nothing like the film, outside of some names and the general plot. It was some years later that I was able to appreciate it on its own merits and the similarities between the theme and some of Well's work is quite obvious.
 

Patito de Hule

Ad Honorem
Jan 2009
3,333
Minneapolis, MN
I first read the book in High School. I had to force myself to finish it when I realized it was nothing like the film, outside of some names and the general plot. It was some years later that I was able to appreciate it on its own merits and the similarities between the theme and some of Well's work is quite obvious.
High school kids who see a movie then read the book are very often disapointed by the book. Some things work well in drama where much of the story is delivered by the sights and by the actors' actions. Other things work better in books that are narrative directed. Narrators and talking heads detract from the action/visual orientation of the cinema.
 

Cicero

Ad Honorem
Dec 2009
7,829
Tennessee
High school kids who see a movie then read the book are very often disapointed by the book.

I have pondered this issue myself - which is better the book or the movie. I think that with me, all things being equal, it is which ever I exierience first - that becomes the "normal" version.

Two examples:

Dr. Zhivago. I saw the movie as an impressionable child and fell in love with it. I tried reading the book as an adult 10 years ago and couldn't get past the first few chapters as they differed from the movie, and that was unsatisfactory. I did go back and read the whole book a few years ago, but still like the movie better .. and it that was written by a Nobel Prize winner, Boris Pasternak.

Lord of the Rings trilogy:

I read these books in late adolescence in a time of laziness - the longest time of sheer idleness that I have had in my entire life. I fell in love with them. It may be heresy to say, but the movies didn't live up to my expectations.

I'm some what afraid to read the book Planet of the Apes, as I am so familiar with and like the movies.
 

galteeman

Ad Honorem
Apr 2008
2,198
Sodom and Begorrah
Fair dues to Heston he played a blinder in that. I remember him being interviewed about making the movie and he told the story of how after a few days shooting people noticed in the canteen that all of the folks dressed as chimps had started to sit together and all of the gorillas, orangutans and humans at seperate tables.
 

Cicero

Ad Honorem
Dec 2009
7,829
Tennessee
Fair dues to Heston he played a blinder in that. I remember him being interviewed about making the movie and he told the story of how after a few days shooting people noticed in the canteen that all of the folks dressed as chimps had started to sit together and all of the gorillas, orangutans and humans at seperate tables.

Seggregation is innate in primates then?:eek:
Funny ancecdote though!
 

Patito de Hule

Ad Honorem
Jan 2009
3,333
Minneapolis, MN
I have pondered this issue myself - which is better the book or the movie. I think that with me, all things being equal, it is which ever I exierience first - that becomes the "normal" version.
I think there's a natural tendency to feel that way--the second version just doesn't live up to expectations. But it seems especially true of youngsters.

Except for Charles Dickens and a few others I always liked the descriptions of things, feelings, emotions etc. that can't be quite shown in the moves. Boy meets girl. His face show his eager anticipation but acute shyness. That can all be depicted in a movie, but is likely to come off as over-eageness or embarrassment or even both. Know what I mean?

A lot of writers, however, have overdone it because they are 1) being paid by the word, 2) writing a serial in a magazine, and 3) writing to a Victorian audience.