Have you ever been sitting
there watching a movie based on one of your favorite novels? And you're just so disappointed. You're was like, Oh, I
could've done that better. Oh, they cut out my
favorite minor character. That scene was totally botched, I
think whenever they make a book into a movie, they have to make compromises. And you're seeing it through the
filmmaker's perspective, but they're at least usually just sort of trying
to capture the essence of the book. But then there's those movies that
you see and it's what did they do? They weren't even trying. This is almost nothing like the book. They took a basic idea and then
they changed it completely. Well, that's what we're
talking about today. We're going to go into five classic
books that are nothing like their movies. Before we dive in, my
name is Ellie Dashwood. This is my channel where I talk about
history, classic literature, and writing. If you like any of those
topics, please subscribe. If you don't that's okay. You're still cooly awesome. Now let's go into number
one: Love and Friendship. Okay. So if you have never heard of Love and
Friendship, it is a movie that came out in 2016, starring Kate Beckinsale. And it's supposedly based
on a Jane Austen story. Now, first off, I want to clarify
that Jane Austen did write a story called Love and Friendship
as part of her childhood works. But it's not based on that story. It's actually based on a short novellette
that she wrote called Lady Susan. So they just liked the other name better. So they stole it and stuck it on Lady
Susan when they made it into this movie. Anyway, the basic story is there's
the main character Lady Susan. And she is a s elfish seductress. She's been recently widowed. So she's seducing her way through
men, trying to find a good match with a guy who was money, of course. But she was having this affair
with this married guy and his wife sort of put an end to that. So she gets kicked out of their house. Because she was staying with them
because this is the Regency Era and everyone just stays with people. And so she having nowhere else to go
shows up of her brother and sisters in law's house and causes their life havoc. Now the basic plot line and the characters
like names and who they are is very similar in both the book and the movie. And that is it. Because if you read the book, it's
this really interesting psychological maneuvering between Lady Susan
and her sister-in-law Catherine. And it reminds me so much
a Fanny Price and Miss. Crawford in Mansfield Park. In Mansfield Park, we definitely
see Fanny coming up against the Crawfords, who she knows are bad
news, but nobody else seems to know. And so she's trying to protect the
family, but at the same time, it's just this weird dynamic going on. And I feel like it's that sort
of on steroids in Lady Susan. We definitely see this interesting
psychological maneuvering and trying to protect people. But also Lady Susan, so
like the master manipulator. And it's a fascinating read. You should definitely check it out. Of course, Austen never disappoints. So after reading that, I'm like,
I'm so excited to go to this movie. They turned it into this farce
slash parody of Jane Austen. The characters are weirdly
drawn out and idiotic. And they make all these risque jokes
that isn't a Jane Austen trademark. Exactly. They took one of Jane Austen's
masterpieces and turned it into a parody. Right. So it's kind of like taking Star Wars
and turning into Spaceballs or Robin Hood into Robin Hood: Men in Tights. Yeah, that has a place in society. But know that's what you're doing. Don't try to pass it
off as the real thing. Right. it was like, this is not Lady Susan. So that is number one on this list where
the book is so much better than the movie. You should totally check
out Lady Susan, the book. Now up for number two, which I feel like
is kind of the exact opposite situation. It is the Phantom of the Opera. Yes, I have to immediately say I love
the movie, The Phantom of the Opera. I love the stage play because of
course the movie is a rendition of the musical written by Andrew Lloyd Webber. Actually saw the stage plate. It was one of the coolest
nights of my life. Cause I saw it in England on
Her Majesty's Theater stage. And it was so cool. So of course I'm like, "Oh wow. Usually the book is better. Right? "
So I read the book by Gaston Leroux and
it came out in the early 19 hundreds. And again, it's one of those
things where it's the basic idea. There's this creepy guy under
the opera house who's obsessed with this girl named Christine. And he sort of disfigured. And she also has this lover named Raoul. That basic ideas still there, but. The book is just kinda weird and creepy. and it's told from the perspective of
a detective trying to get to the bottom of what happened at the opera house. And also the Phantom is
just this really creepy guy. Like I feel Gerard Butler led us to
believe the Phantom was kind of hot. And the Phantom is not hot. He's actually this guy named Eric
who owns a construction company. Yeah, that's right. He owns a construction company. I don't know why that just makes
the Phantom seem less mysterious. It's just like, no, my name's Eric. I own a construction company. Also, I'm obsessed with this girl and I'm
going to kidnap her under the Opera house. Anyway, this is one of the ones
where the movie is so much better, and the play is so much better. You can read the novel, if you want and
meet Eric owner of a construction company. So number three, the Scarlet Pimpernel. Now this is one of those ones that the
book is totally different from the movie. And I'm talking about the 1982
version with Anthony Andrews, Jane Seymour, and Ian McKellen. But they're both incredibly
awesomely epic in their own ways. And I love both of them, which I think
is fascinating that they were able to do that because they both have such
strong storylines and characters. And they're just both great. If you haven't read or
watch these, you should. But I'm going to talk about what I
think is the main differences here. But first, I'm going to tell
you a little bit about it. Because I know not, everybody's very
familiar with the Scarlet Pimpernel. And what it is, it was the story
of the first modern superhero. If you don't believe me, I'm going
to make a whole video on this topic. This book was first published
in 1905 by Baroness Orczy, who was a noble woman, obviously. But she had been economically
brought down and it was first a stage play and then a novel. But it's historical fiction because she
wrote it about the French revolution. And the Scarlet Pimpernel was a British
aristocrat who was saving French nobility from dying at the guillotine. Because during the French
revolution, they kind of went crazy. They're just killing everybody. And so he would go and he would save
them before they could be killed and he can bring them back to England. So the Scarlet Pimpernel was his
superhero name, but he had this persona as Sir Percy Blakeney. Sort of like how, Batman is Bruce
Wayne or Superman is Clark Kent. So Sir Percy Blakeney is the original
superhero who sort of acted like an idiot. He was dumb. He was just all about his clothes. He was just like, "I'm not
really smart or reliable." And of course that way nobody would
ever guess that he is the one who is stealing people from prison
in France to save their lives. Now, he gets married to this
French woman and that happens in both the book and the movie. Now here is the major difference. I feel like between
the book and the movie. Is the main focus of the story in the
book is told from his wife's perspective. Where in the movie it's more focused
on the Scarlet Pimpernel himself. So in the book, its this really
unusual romance between two married people from the wife's perspective. Where she's like," I'm
married to this guy. He's kind of an idiot and that's really
bothering me because also kind of hot. And I have no clue that
he's a superhero secretly. Also all of a sudden the villain
shows up and is threatening me." And so that's her plot line that we have
to watch play out throughout the book. And in the movie, it's more from
the perspective of the Pimpernel. And he's like, yeah, "I'm a
superhero saving these people. Now I'm married to this French woman
that I have mixed feelings about. I don't know what to do, but
everyone thinks I'm dumb. I'm just going to save people." So I think it's interesting both
perspectives and the plot lines. The plot lines run very differently. The Pimpernel saves different people
in the movie than he does in the book. And it's just. That sort of thing. But either way, they're both fascinating. And also if you are not interested
in having to get the book and read it, you can have someone
read it to you through Audible. If you think this is going to
be an ad for the Audible Premium Plus subscription, you are right. So let's just take a brief minute and
talk about the awesome aspects of Audible. Audible Premium Plus is an audio book
subscription that lets you have unlimited streaming of the Audible Plus Catalog. And that catalog has some pretty
epic titles such as Pride and Prejudice read by Rosamund Pike. Yes, that's right. You could have Jane Bennet
from Pride and Prejudice 2005 reading you Pride and Prejudice. That is pretty cool. My favorite part of their subscription
is that every month you get one credit to choose a book to keep forever. So for example, if you listen to Pride
and Prejudice and you really loved it, you could buy it with your one credit. And then even after you cancel your
subscription, you still get to keep it and you can listen to it all you want
without having to pay anything more. Right now, you can sign up for a free
one month trial with my affiliate link below, and they'll actually give you two
credits, so you can get two books to keep. That way, even if you cancel your
membership after your trial ends, you still have those two books to
listen to and enjoy Again, the link to get your free trial is in the
description of this video below. So definitely go check that out. I personally love Audible and
I definitely recommend it. Thank you so much for
supporting my channel .
Now on the very important
topic of the Scarlet Pimpernel. I actually do have the audiobook from
Audible of the Scarlet Pimpernel. It Is so well-read I actually did
use one of my credits to get it. And so I still listen to it all the time. I know I'm weird. I like the Scarlet Pimpernel
way too much, but you should definitely check out that title. If you ever get on Audible. next number four little
house on the Prairie now. Okay. I know this is not a movie. It's the 1970s to 1980s television series. But let's just pretend it's a
really long movie for this five movies are nothing like the book. But yeah, this really nothing like
the books .Now, I liked both of them. The books are a fascinating
look into life on the Prairie. It is an autobiography written by Laura
Ingalls Wilder who grew up in the American Midwest during the late 18 hundreds. And it gives us interesting details like
how they spring, cleaned their house. I remember being hogs heads being cured
and just so many interesting things. In the seventies and eighties,
Michael Landon took that and turned it into a TV show. That was so seventies. It was so eighties. And so not like the book, but it's
kind of hilarious because not only are a lot of the characters different. She has whole siblings in this TV
show that didn't exist in real life. The hair is different. The hair so seventies, it's kind of funny. B ut I think the biggest change is
a Little House on the Prairie was turned into social commentary and
completely 1970 social commentary on topics and issues that if you had
asked the Ingalls family, what they really thought on them, you would have
gotten the complete opposite answer. Right? Cause I mean, they're dealing with
everything from racism to weight-ism to the rights of circus performers. I don't think there's an issue
that they did not try to tackle. I mean, there's probably some, but it's
just social commentary the whole time. Okay. Number five. Pride and Prejudice. Now, before anyone tries to kill
me because they think I'm dissing either in the 95 or the 2005 version. I'm going to clarify that I'm talking
about Pride and Prejudice 1940. Yes. There is a 1940 version
of Pride and Prejudice. It's black and white. It stars Greer Garson and Lawrence Oliver. And. It's nothing like the book. First off the most obvious difference,
they took Pride and Prejudice, and they threw it into the 1830s fashion-wise. So you see these big
hoop skirts happenin'. There's none of those empire
waisted to dresses that makes everyone look pregnant in this show. One of the reasons they did
this is it came out the year after Gone with the Wind. And of course Gone with the
Wind was such a big hit. It's like, "Hey, everybody's
loving these hoop skirts. We need the hoop skirts
in Pride and Prejudice. Also, if we reuse the hoop
skirts from Gone with the Wind, we will save on the costumes." Right? These movie makers knew what
they were doing budget wise. But they also took a lot
of liberties with the plot. For example, they turned Mr. Collins into a librarian
instead of a minister. And they added random archery
scenes because of course, archery belongs in Pride and Prejudice. But I think the biggest blaring obvious
difference is Lady Catherine De Bourgh. We all know Lady Catherine de Bourgh. She's horrid. She's the worst aunt ever. No. 1940 version of Lady Catherine
de Bourgh is so glad Darcy from true love with Elizabeth. The only reason she didn't like her for a
second, was maybe she is after his money. But as soon as Lady Catherine realizes its
true love she's so happy for her nephew. On what is that Lady Catherine de Bourgh? Now actually I want to talk a
little bit about one of the reasons for all of these changes, too. Is the whole point of this Pride and
Prejudice was to idyllize England. This came out in 1940 and at that
point, world war II was raging in Europe, but America had not entered. Of course they don't enter until 1941. But there's this whole debate going
on in American society of do we go and help England and the allies in this war? And the general consensus was no. Because everyone remember
what happened in world war 1. It was like, "Hey world
war one, wasn't our fight. And we got involved in it and it got a
lot of people killed and the ones that weren't killed came back traumatized. We're not going to do that again. Let Europe deal with its own issues." But of course like any debate, at the
time, there was the opposite side of like, "Hey, these are our friends in Europe. We need to go save them." And the movie makers of Pride
and Prejudice were on that side. So what they were trying to do was
paint this very idyllic scene of England that would make Americans
think, "Oh, that's the motherland that America descended from. We need to go protect them." And so, if you have all these warm
fuzzy feelings, when you watch Pride and Prejudice about England,
And then you read in the newspaper, "oh, they're getting bombed." That causes you to be angry. Right? It's like, "no, that's, that's the
warm, fuzzy, Pride and Prejudice place." And then when you're angry, you're
like, boom, we're entering the war. We've got to protect
Pride and Prejudice Land. Right? Well, that's kind of what
they were hoping for. Now. Of course, we all think that America
entered the war because Japan attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7th, 1941. But really is that true? Or was it pride and prejudice
that just altered all of history. That's the real reason
America entered the war. I don't know. These are the deep mysteries
of life that we may never know. But anyway, that was the list of five
movies that are nothing like their books. And the real reason America
entered world war two apparently. Let me know in the comments below
which of these books and movies you love, or maybe don't love. And subscribe to my channel, if you
want to watch more videos like this. Anyway, keeping Epic and awesome. Bye.
