...and then along came a movie that had absolutely nothing to do with the book.
Okay, I know I broke the rules of seeing the movie before I read the book but I didn't know it was based on a book at the time and the movie is what made me want to read it in the first place.
So here's what I decided: I liked the movie. It wasn't spectacular, but I enjoyed it. I liked the story-line and I really like Morgan Freeman as Alex Cross. I just wish that I had heard about the book before I watched the movie. I had many expectations of the book, and they failed me, because of the stupid movie.
For one, I had the character Alex Cross held up on a pedestal. Morgan Freeman is such a graceful and charismatic actor and he portrayed Cross as this competent, knowledgable detective. In the book, Cross is not like this at all. He is young and inexperienced. He is a good detective, yes, but he is not yet respected.
I also could not get the picture of Morgan Freeman out of my head. I pictured Cross as this older man in his 60s, not a young man in his late 20s/early 30s. So when Patterson described Cross and Jezzie's relationship, it was extremely uncomfortable for me to read, and I felt this way throughout most of the book.
And I'm not going to even begin about the plot. Where did the plot for the movie even come from? AHHH
I really think I could have liked this book... if I hadn't seen the movie first. It's sad, really. I would much rather hate a movie than a novel.
Word of Advice: If you can manage to read the book before you see the movie, do it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I know what you mean about movies ruining books...or...whichever way you want to argue that. I see you're going to read the Bourne books. I've been staring at those on my shelf for a long time now. I think the movies are great and am nervous about the book - the reverse of my normal routine (read the book, see the movie). I think either way, it's different than you expect!
ReplyDeleteGlad to see you're in the 52 in 52 challenge!