TMP writes:
Adapting a novel is, well, hard. You have two opposing forces going head to head during the development process: the need to appease fans of the source material, and the need to reach out to non-fans and MAKE them fans. And, if you're lucky, you might be able to spend a fraction of that time actually crafting a good movie. Because of this, most novel adaptations come out as failures in one of these regards; they either confuse or alienate non-fans, or piss off the hardcore fans due to changes in their beloved source material. It's very hard to succeed with all audiences when it comes to adaptations. But does The Hunger Games manage to achieve this feat? And more importantly, does it succeed as a good film all on its own?
In a world where monsters attack at night, we see yet another world, post-apocalypse, where a handful of people struggle to survive.
Crime Scene Berlin-Nightlife Killer Review: This documentary series really drops the ball with its storytelling.
In a movie that largely sidesteps what the war is about, “Civil War” puts us in the point of view of journalists who make it clear there are no heroes in war, just dead bodies.
I think it can win over the fans that haven't read the books. I have heard from a few people that have seen the movie that haven't read the books. They loved the movie and were able to follow the story without any problem. You really don't know what you're missing unless you did read the book. The movie was made very well and explains enough so that one can understand where the story is taking them.