Movie Adaptations Of Books Hated By The Authors But Loved By Critics

"The book was better." It's what we always say and hear when discussing movies that have been adapted from or are otherwise based on books. And the vast majority of the time, it's an accurate statement — movies are at a disadvantage by nature of their medium when it comes to being able to properly bring a story from page to screen. That being said, most authors tend to be content as long as the movie based on their book is at least good, regardless of how well it is or isn't able to fully convey everything they were trying to express in their original written text.

Remarkably, that isn't always the case. There are a number of books adapted into films that have turned out to be certified classics — and yet, for one reason or another, the authors of the original material just weren't thrilled with what they saw. Sometimes it's a personal gripe; other times it seems to stem from some aspect of the business transaction that went sour. In a few cases, the author was even initially involved in the movie but still ended up dissatisfied with the direction the project ended up going in. One particularly infamous example even sees the original author as the credited screenwriter for the movie — and yet they still hate the finished product.

For kids of a certain age, "The NeverEnding Story" was one of those childhood-defining films that people watched on repeat until the VHS tape wore out. It wisely features dual child protagonists as well as a child damsel in distress, and its incredible practical effects and puppet work helped it to age remarkably well for a movie from 1984. The story follows a bullied kid (Barret Oliver) who hides in his school's dusty storage room and reads the titular tale about a mystical land called Fantasia, soon realizing that he himself is somehow both part of the story and also affecting the book in real-time.

One person who didn't find it endearing was Michael Ende, who wrote the 1979 book that the movie is based on. According to People, the month of the movie's initial release in Germany, Ende was already ragging on it. "The makers of the film simply did not understand the book at all," Ende said. He went on to call the film "revolting." Though Ende was involved in the early phases of the production, he says that director Wolfgang Petersen rewrote the screenplay without Ende's knowledge after Ende had already okayed the original version. He said he was "horrified" by the final script.

The story of how Walt Disney chased the rights to adapt the "Mary Poppins" series of books into a movie for years as author P.L. Travers repeatedly turned him down was later turned into a movie by Disney itself. And while "Saving Mr. Banks" definitely showed glimpses of Travers being appalled at what her story was turning into at the hands of Disney, it definitely softened the real-life author's true reaction to the original film.

In a Salon feature about "Saving Mr. Banks" and the true story that inspired it, it's revealed that Walt Disney pestered Travers for a whopping 15 years to get her to sign off on a "Mary Poppins" movie. Had money not gotten tight for Travers, she likely would've continued to turn him down indefinitely, but she needed the cash and so she finally relented. One of the most famous stories about Travers' feelings toward the "Mary Poppins" movie is that she hated it so much that she openly cried at the premiere. Despite the fact that "Saving Mr. Banks" reframes those tears as tears of joy, Travers was anything but happy at what Disney had done to her story. 

As Vulture describes when referencing the biography "Mary Poppins, She Wrote: The Life of P.L. Travers," Disney was embarrassed that Travers was so openly upset at the premiere — a premiere, by the way, that she wasn't even initially invited to. 

What's fascinating about Stephen King repeatedly ragging on the movie "The Shining" over the decades is that there is no shortage of really bad films based on his books. So the fact that one of his novels was adapted into one of the most acclaimed and influential horror movies ever made should make him feel pretty good. In defense of King's criticisms of the film, "The Shining" is a deeply personal story for him. In the book "The Stephen King Companion" (via Den of Geek), King explained that one of the impetuses of the story came from him realizing that he "was horrified by [his] occasional feelings of real antagonism toward [his] children." So there's a lot more going on here than simply a story he wrote being turned into a film.

One of King's frequent complaints is that the film version of Jack Torrance (Jack Nicholson) is already unhinged from the start of the film and that his journey to becoming a man who could let the sinister influences of the Overlook Hotel transform him into someone who wants to murder his wife and child is a big part of the novel and is best when it occurs more slowly and gradually. King has also said that Stanley Kubrick's take on the story is far too cold and is a clear example of style over substance, conceding that the film features striking visual imagery but likens it to "a beautiful car that had no engine in it."

There have been multiple adaptations of E.B. White's beloved children's book "Charlotte's Web," from film to stage to even video games. But most would agree that the definitive one is the 1973 animated feature film produced by Hanna-Barbera. It tells the bittersweet tale of a pig named Wilbur (Henry Gibson) who learns hard lessons about life both by virtue of learning he is intended for slaughter and in befriending a dying spider named Charlotte (Debbie Reynolds).

Though it got some criticism for being underwhelming in the visual department — as was somewhat typical of Hanna-Barbera's work — the acting was highly praised and the movie was ultimately well-received. White, on the other hand, was almost entirely negative on the whole thing — both the behind-the-scenes drama of its production to the quality of the final product. In letters from the author published by his friend Gene Deitch, White spoke of the nightmare of having to deal with Hanna-Barbera and resented the fact that the movie's plot was constantly interrupted by saccharine musical numbers. Ultimately, he summed us the movie as a "travesty," and opined, "that's what you get for getting embroiled in Hollywood." 

While not a critically acclaimed movie per se, especially at the time of its release, the original "Death Wish" has since seen enough positive reappraisals that is critical consensus now falls firmly in positive territory. The less said about the long line of dreadful sequels and the abysmal 2018 Eli Roth-directed remake, the better, but the Charles Bronson original was a crowd-pleasing exploitation-era action thriller about a man named Paul Kersey who turns to violent vigilante justice after his family is attacked in their home.

The "crowd-pleasing" part is precisely what the author of the original book had an issue with. Brian Garfield's 1972 novel was also a tale of bloody revenge, but he wanted readers to be shocked by Paul's actions and for the moral of the story to be that answering violence with violence is never the answer. Taking what he saw as a cautionary tale about violence and turning it into the kind of movie that has audiences cheering on violence is the exact opposite of what Garfield had intended. The author even wrote a follow-up book called "Death Sentence" in 1975, about Paul regretting and rethinking his actions, as a direct response to the "Death Wish" movie.  Unsurprisingly, "Death Sentence" wasn't used as source material for any of the four "Death Wish" sequels or the remake.

Author Roald Dahl said and did some things in his life that have severely tarnished his legacy and overshadowed his work (per Time magazine). With that in mind, when looking at something like his criticisms of the first film adaptation of his story "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory," it's easy to take a "who cares what he had to say about anything?" attitude.

Nevertheless, it's still worth exploring his complicated relationship to the making of 1971's "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory" and his subsequent rejection of the final product. Though he got sole screenwriting credit on the film, it has since been well-documented that Dahl's initial script was extensively retooled and rewritten to the point where it scarcely resembled his original draft (per The Guardian). Beyond not recognizing the movie he supposedly wrote, Dahl also took issue with casting American Gene Wilder as Wonka rather than an English actor, the shifting of the title role from Charlie to Wonka, the various plot additions, and the movie's upbeat songs and score.

Would Dahl have preferred the Tim Burton version that was released in 2005 and claimed to be much more faithful to the original book? It's impossible to say — but for what it's worth, Gene Wilder called it an "insult" (per Entertainment Weekly).