The movie “The Ruins,” based on Scott Smith’s 2006 best-selling novel, will be in theaters on April 4. That gives you a little time to read the book before you see the movie. After watching the trailer for the movie, I’m a bit afraid that Smith’s absolutely riveting and wickedly spooky book might turn into just another cheesy horror flick.
In the novel, two young American couples visiting Cancun make friends with a German whose brother has gone off to join an archaelogical dig in the area. Searching for him, the small group find themselves in the jungles of Yucatan at a deserted Mayan site where they encounter something sinister and terrifying. The story becomes one of survival as the characters react in different ways to the life-or-death situation.
In the book, there’s a slow and suspenseful unveiling of a menace that will be difficult to reproduce on film. The good news, though, is that Scott Smith wrote both the book and the screenplay, and this double duty worked well for his last film venture. His screenplay for “A Simple Plan” based on his 1993 novel was nominated for an Oscar in 1998.
Also, Carter Smith, the director of “The Ruins,” said in an interview with the Chicago Tribune, that “the movie is significantly different from the book. There’s definitely lots of changes, so it’ll be a new experience for readers.”
My advice is to read the book now (it’s in paperback), and then wait for the Beifuss review before you see the movie.
Responses to ““The Ruins” by Scott Smith – Will the movie ruin the book?”
April 13th, 2008 at 10:34 am
Did everyone who read this book drink the kool-aid? Riveting?? Wickedly spooky? Are you kidding me? The book was not good, and the fact that it was a best-seller reflects the sad state of most Americans’ idea of good fiction. I unfortunately snatched it from a friend during a conference. The ‘unraveling’ of the menace is definitely slow, but far from suspenseful. The characters are bland and the story itself is not only NOT horrifying, thrilling, or suspenseful, but it is also far too long. The writing is mediocre at best. I found myself wishing for the characters all to be killed off slowly and painfully in order to justify my waste of time with this 500 page piece of crap. Resist the hype - skip the book AND the movie. I can’t imagine the movie could improve enough on it to make it worth the viewing.
April 19th, 2008 at 11:21 am
I couldn’t agree more. This is torture porn in book form - not that I’m against torture porn, but in film it’s usually short, sweet and bloody, not 500 pages of narrative from characters I either dislike or don’t care about at all.
Having read all the rave reviews of this book, I can’t help but wonder if the blood-red flowers so ubiquitous in the novel don’t have some hallucinogenic properties.
Any changes the director makes would be for the better, not sure how he could make it worse. And it’s not that book is terrible, but it’s mediocre at best and could have been much better. The only redeeming value I found was a post-modern emphasis on the barriers of language.
2 comment.