Sometimes reading a book that becomes a movie is a disadvantage, especially if the filmmakers stick extraordinarily close to the original story.
Thus was my ailment when I saw The Ruins this week. Scott Smith, who authored the book, also wrote the screenplay. Obviously having the book’s author pen the movie’s script will in most cases keep it pretty similar.
With that in mind, this movie held little surprises for me. Everything that happened, I expected to happen. Except for a tiny bit at the very end, which was VERY different, nothing stuck out at me as veering from the book.
All that was to preface this review because going into a movie where you know the entire story sort of lacks an element that other moviegoers will get. Did I find it boring, while others wouldn’t because they had no clue what was coming?
Trying to ignore that situation, I thought the movie was pretty good. You have two couples on vacation in Central America, they meet a German guy who asks if they want to help him find his brother, who was going to check out some ancient Mayan ruins and was late in coming back.
So they head off, eager for an adventure, and soon find themselves in the most horrific predicament anyone could imagine. The ruins holds something evil that the natives have been keeping contained.
I wont go into detail about the ruins or what lies there, because that pretty much gives away what you will be discovering on your own.
The movie is rated R, which is a good thing because they didn’t hold back from the gore and blood that the book was famous for.
I liked the cast a lot. Jonathan Tucker, (from The Black Donnellys), Jena Malone, Shawn Ashmore (Jimmy on Smallville) and Laura Ramsey all fit the bill exactly as you pictured them from the book.
In fact, the entire movie was done so well, I felt like I was watching what I had pictured in my head while reading.
Sure, there are probably some minor differences between the two, but for the most part, this was one of the closest adaptations I’ve ever seen. I did have a fundamental issue with the change they made at the end, but for the most part it didn’t stray.
A decent horror flick, loads of blood, gore and violence, but also a unique plot. Check it out.
Loved the book, I’m glad they stayed true to it for the movie. But as you say it does take something away. Although far better than taking a good book and making a silly movie.
Scotty Dub’s last blog post..Casual Dress Friday: The most un-wonderful time of year
Mo is this worth spending the $7.00 bucks to go see or wait for it on DVD?
I wonder if it was worse for you because it was the type of story that you don’t want to know what’s coming next, versus a movie/book that it’s a thriller-type story.
Hard to say Cap’n…there really isn’t much out there right now anyways, but if you haven’t seen The Bank Job, I’d spend my money there first.
But it does look pretty good up on the big screen.
I’d say wherever you like to watch movies the most, this one is probably good either way.
@ Jina - Yeah, this was a movie where the discovery of what lies at the ruins is as important as the thrills and blood. So knowing that part already sort of lends itself to less fun since you already know.
Mike, I haven’t seen the movie yet, but I read the book at your suggestion. From the previews, however, they show one of the girls having the vine inside her… That’s not exactly a “minor” change from the plot of the book. That’s a fundamental shift of the entire plot because it changes the dynamics of the four students and their characters. Did it not make a difference in the movie?
Well, how is that different? Maybe my memory of the book is blurry, but I know one of the girls had it inside her…
What is different?
Dont most girls?!?! oh wait, nevermind, wrong topic…
How long has it been since you read the book, Mike? That’s like a major part of the plot. It was in Eric, not one of the girls.
Oh, well then…maybe there are more differences than I thought. I didn’t think it was a “fundamental” different, I think one of the characters was supposed to have the vine in them, and one of them does.
I think to me, the big difference is the ending…
Been awhile since I read it though Jason, probably in summer of 2006 when it came out…I think I read it the weekend it hit bookstores.
@ Mo well even though it has Iceman (Jimmy Olsen in it) its not urging me to get up and go see it , I might wait for the dvd… seems like a renter to me…but thanks for the info..