I refuse to see Where the Wild Things Are.
I've never been a fan of the children's book, penned in 1963 by Maurice Sendak. As a fearful child, I was always freaked out by the story and the concept of monsters lurking in my bedroom.
It's more of a matter of principle, though. As an avid reader, I understand the perils of a poorly made movie adaptation. I've seldom been impressed with the movie versions of my favorite books, save for the epic and much-acclaimed 1939 production of Gone With the Wind.
Case in point: Recently, I was excited to read the latest Nicholas Sparks novel, The Last Song. However, I became crestfallen upon learning that Sparks wrote the screenplay for The Last Song -- set to star Miley Cyrus -- before he even wrote the novel. To make matters worse, he let Cyrus name the protagonist, Ronnie.
When I sat down to enjoy The Last Song, I couldn't conjure up my own image of Ronnie. My imagination had been robbed and replaced with Cyrus' face, voice and mannerisms. At each page turn, I was haunted by snippets of Cyrus' hit "Party in the USA" playing in my head.
In the coming months, we'll be faced with a litany of literary adaptations. For example, we'll see Cormac McCarthy's The Road and Alice Sebold's The Lovely Bones hitting theaters in November and December, respectively.
Fans are known for criticizing a book-turned-movie's inadequacies, saying, for example: "The characters aren't supposed to look like that." "That's not what the accent sounded like in my head." "I can't believe they omitted that crucial part."
It certainly must be a difficult task to cram hundreds of pages of characterizations, dialogue and the ever-important plot twists into a palatable two-hour movie.
So why do it?
It's an easy money-maker, for sure. There's often little risk involved when using a book as a launching pad. Mostly everyone who loves a particular book will seek out the movie version, eager to prolong the literary experience.
However, problems can also materialize when a film adds a lot of unnecessary content that wasn't in the original book.
Consider holiday favorite How the Grinch Stole Christmas!. The children's book, written by Dr. Suess in 1957, is a simplistic tale with an important message about the meaning of holiday spirit.
Somehow, though, the compelling story was transformed in 2000 to an action-packed 104-minute movie starring Jim Carrey. The departure from the original story -- and the scenes that were added -- seemed nonsensical to me.
In the same way, Sendak's Where the Wild Things Are was originally written in a total of 10 sentences. It seems a little mind-boggling that 10 sentences can be so effortlessly translated into a 94-minute movie. Obviously, some superfluous scenes have been added.
Even without any expertise in the film industry, I have no doubt that Where the Wild Things Are will continue to score big at the box office; it was already ranked No. 1 last weekend when it opened and received many favorable reviews from critics.
Still, I can't help lamenting the situation at hand.
This trend seems to have become an irrevocable facet of the entertainment industry. Now, even all-things-books Web site Bookreporter.com has a special section called Books Into Movies, which highlights the novels that are soon set to hit the silver screen.
So, for the time being, Where the Wild Things Are will probably keep reeling in viewers: a visible reminder of this phenomenon. To compensate, I'll just cling to the books that have remained mercifully untouched by the hands of Hollywood -- at least, as of now.
