MovieChat Forums > Inkheart (2009) Discussion > Quite possibly the most butchered book t...

Quite possibly the most butchered book to movie ever.

posted 10 years ago by darinlwarren
3 replies | jump to latest

Saw the movie years ago, JUST read the book and went back to watch the trailer because I want to see the movie again.

Why not just call the movie something else. The movie IS NOT INKHEART. Is has so little in common with the book it's ridiculous.

I understand changing a few small things to make it more palatable for a theatrical release but they've butchered it beyond recognition. And seriously, that is NOT an over statement.

The movie may be good, it's just not INKHEART.

[–] Prismark10 10 years ago

The movie is appallingly written.

Its that man again!!

[–] hobbychain-460-134018 10 years ago

I think we're forgetting the Bourne series which is related to the books by name only.

[–] cannonball-531-92699 8 years ago

Personally, I think the movie is better than the first book (books 2 and 3 were amazing, 1 had some pacing issues, and felt like a huge exposition). There were some changes, some that weren't necessary, but others that were improvements. But I think you're going a tad overboard on your criticism that it was nothing alike. It certainly captured the essence and spirit of the story, which is what a movie is meant to do. Dustfinger was portrayed beautifully, Bettany truly made the character feel real; quite possibly my favorite character portrayal ever. The scene in the market square, just the look on his face as he's preparing the dragon's breath, in that moment he's not an actor... he IS Dustfinger.