In the movie business, book to movie transitions sometimes work (Harry Potter, Hunger Games)
Then they sometimes don't (Percy Jackson, Twilight)
And sometimes, they are abominations (Eragon)
The question is, I know of two book series that have movies in the works, and one where
Number 1: Artemis Fowl
Number 2: Maximum Ride
And a third one where, while there is interest, there is great debate on how feisable it is: Warriors
Now, here's the debate here....
Artemis Fowl has the benefit of a villain protagonist to start with, and a lot of character development to play with. However, the books are the shortest of the three, and the main director mentioned for it (The guy behind ORder of the Phoenix) will fuse the story of the first two books in the film. Now, this could be an interesting inversion to the current trend of two part movies, but it could also cut out details like the Eragon movie did if done incorrectly .
Maximum Ride has more age variation allowed to the dynamics of the characters mutations (While Artemis needs an actor who can play a young Artemis correctly). However, while it has eight odd books or something....I wouldn't want to make a movie of the books after 3, without heavy revision. Heck, it could be a case when the movies are better with the books. But the later books reps could be a serious problem, like Prince Caspian was
Finally, you have the Warriors. It has a crazy huge fanbase, a large depth of material....and it stars cats. It might have to be in CGI to work, and the problem is the series would have to be written for its fans. Not recomended 10+ years, but the average age of 18. That is a fact that could make or break the movie.
So, which would be a better movie series capable of being like HP or HG?
Log in to comment