Yesterday I saw the mortal instruments movie and I was very disappointed with the plot. Some things that weren't in the movie were inserted and the others were deleted. But nonetheless, the acting was very good. What do u think?

I watched the movie last weekend. I´ve read the books previously. I think it was great considering the (sometimes) amazingly high expectations fans have. It´s a movie, so it can´t be a word by word interpretation of the books, specially because each reader creates "it´s own world" while reading. It just is not possible to reach everybody´s perfect idea of a movie, whatever great the acting is or the best intentions of everybody involved in the process are. It´s like Harry Potter, some people love it and some people hate it. I just enjoyed it for what it is: an entertaining movie

I am incredibly surprised that you thought the acting was good. The acting was terrible and cheesy as all get out. The entire movie was.... It ruined the books for me too.

It shouldn't ruin the books for you, they're different things. At least, that's my way to see it.

The movie wasn't great, they made a lot of mistakes and changed important things. The worst, to me, was Valentine. They missed the entire essence of the character and it pissed me off. I really like the cast, though, and I think they did the best they could considering the script wasn't amazing.

I did not say the acting was great, just that fan expectations sometimes can't be reached (whatever the acting is great, good enough or plain boring) In this case I liked the casting and I think they did well (like Iriel said, the script is not for them to change, just to play) Maybe I don't take it that seriously because it has not been my favourite series by far (specially considering Cassandra should not have had to start adding more books to an already finished trilogy)

One movie I won't see is Vampire Academy, though. I liked the books but the trailers have already dissapointed me both for the casting choices and the childish acting.

[neofury]

Never take a book made movie as a movie based on the book.

ALWAYS take movies as completely separate entities to a book. Watch the movie for its own sake, not comparing it to the book. We will most likely never have a movie that's 100% true to the book unless someone has a billion dollars to throw around and a movie theater that wants to run a 5 hour movie (or longer)

vampire academy total disappointment... the guy who acted as dimitri... he was suposed to be 25 yrs old... the actor looked too old and acting was terrible.

vampire academy total disappointment... the guy who acted as dimitri... he was suposed to be 25 yrs old... the actor looked too old and acting was terrible.

I don't necessarily agree; I thought the movie was well-done, although a bit cheesy, but stuck to a lot of the main points and facts (i.e. the difference between humans, moroi, dhampir, strigoi; how to kill a strigoi; moroi royalty; etc.) in the book. After all, the first book in the VA series is the worst. Every book gets even better. Thus, there's mostly high school cliques in the first movie, and if they were to make sequels, it would become darker and contain a lot more action. Zoey Deutch was a great Rose Hathaway, although I do agree Dimitri (Danila Kozlovsky) needs a bit of work, but considering he is truly a Russian, the groundwork is there already.

As for the TMI movie, it was even worse than VA. It was an enjoyable movie somewhat, but the faithfulness to the book was off. The ending completely derailed whatever plot that would come in the sequel since the book obviously did not end like that. Lily and Jamie - I didn't feel their chemistry, and I'd much rather have someone else than Jamie fill in Jace's role. Although Lily can act well as Clary, I felt like she played Clary too tough and wise, rather than being a Clary who is just introduced into the world. Magnus' acting ability had me disappointed. And the demon inside Dorothea's body, they totally skimped over major details in that scene, as well as the fact that there are two portals and two portals only. I'm really interested in how they'll make the next movie (assuming if they ever continue) because they totally screwed with a lot of fundamental facts in the first movie.

[jaysee]

Never take a book made movie as a movie based on the book.

ALWAYS take movies as completely separate entities to a book. Watch the movie for its own sake, not comparing it to the book. We will most likely never have a movie that's 100% true to the book unless someone has a billion dollars to throw around and a movie theater that wants to run a 5 hour movie (or longer)

Thumbs up to this.

There are tons of bad book-to-film adaptations. No amount of Hollywood money can truly recreate ones imagination.

[badactorinky]

And then there are the good book-to-film adaptaions of not-so-hot books: Moby Dick was a total winner as adapted by Ray Bradbury, and Jaws [the movie] had it all over Jaws [the book].

[jaysee]

And then there are the good book-to-film adaptaions of not-so-hot books: Moby Dick was a total winner as adapted by Ray Bradbury, and Jaws [the movie] had it all over Jaws [the book].

Totally agree in the Jaws thing. Re-read the book a couple of month back: good but nothing compared to the film. But I also think my reading of it was tainted by the film as I had seen Roy Schneider et al do their take on it way before I had read the book.

I believe in never watching the movie if there is a book. Not Harry Potter, not Percy Jackson, not Darren Shan, never.

Exception only for LoTR, even then, the book is still better.

just pay no mind...

Lol, I JUST saw this...
For me, it was the Percy Jackson movies.
I am a huge fan, I absolutely adore the Percy Jackson (and the Heroes of Olympus for that matter) series, and was so hyped for the movie.
I actually didn't see the Lightning Thief, but I saw the Sea of Monsters and I was horrified.
For one thing, the events made no sense whatsoever, and for another, the portrayal of characters was completely off.
Percy isn't a brave, smart, lead-type, PERFECT hero. In the Sea of Monsters, at the age of 13, he was reckless, yeah a bit smart, but he felt fear and had his moments of insecurity and doubt. And Annabeth being the mature character, even at 13, is there to support him; is someone strong who Percy can lean on... THAT'S what happens in the book.
Nope. Annabeth is reduced to the equivalent of the helpless, useless damsel in distress in the Sea of Monsters movie.
It irks me so much that for people who DON'T know the series and watch the movie, that this is how they will see the characters as. Bleh, I hate movies that ruin the book's name.

so many movie that ruined my imagination from the book;
1. Twilight
2. Jack Reacher
3. percy jackson
4. narnia