Imagine if people defended OTHER projects that ruined the source material...
The Conqueror (1956)
"I don't see why people are SO upset that John Wayne is playing Genghis Khan. Get over it! Film is a different medium than real life and they needed to UPDATE the character. Wayne is an old school, grizzled tough guy, that's TOTALLY faithful to who Genghis Khan was. Khan himself would support Wayne! Maybe try actually WATCHING the movie before you knock it!"
Gulliver's Travels (2010)
"Look, having Jack Black playing Gulliver and setting the story in modern times just gives sooo much more DEPTH than the book ever had. Don't get me wrong, I liked the book, but the film version, Jack is a fully fleshed out Lemuel Gulliver FAR more than what Jonathan Swift ever wrote on the printed page. I LOVE the modern day New York City setting, its so much more visually stunning than Europe in the early 1700s!"
The Time Machine (2002)
"Is having the Morlocks speaking modern day English in the year A.D. 802,701 accurate to what H.G. Wells wrote? No. But that was never the point of the novel. This film is MUCH more faithful to the SPIRIT of what Wells was trying to say. That's why Wells himself approved this version, giving his seal of approval from beyond the grave. If you trolls dislike this version, you simply dislike Wells ideas in the first place, and you're probably socialist-phobic. This is a MODERN retelling, please join us in the 21st century!"