It was definitely one of the stranger trends in literary history in a very long time: take some of the most famous names in history (literary or otherwise) and plunk them down into adventures with zombies, vampires, or sea monsters. Walk into any book store and these titles are lining the shelves (even Anna Karenina got a cyber-makeover), and it's all because of one man: Seth Grahame-Smith. So it was just a matter of time before Hollywood came knocking because Tinseltown loves it when someone has already done their work for them, and here were a big pile of 're-imanginings' right at their fingertips. So deals were struck: it all began when Natalie Portman signed on to star in the film adaptation of Smith's Austen first mash-up, 'Pride and Prejudice and Zombiez' (though she has since dropped out). Now we have news that Tom Hardy is in the running for 'Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter' and I had to ask myself: forget worrying about casting, should we even be making these movies in the first place?

But before you roll your eyes and scroll away, let me be clear: this isn't a rant about how movie versions of books are genetically inferior, nor are these the demands of literary purist. Nope, this is just a discussion about whether these books -- which even as novels have received their fair share of criticism, are destined to become this generation's 'Billy the Kid vs. Dracula.' Or even worse; they just turn out to be plain old bad movies.
Thor Movie Poster
Based on 40 critics

As the son of Odin (Anthony Hopkins), king of the Norse gods, Thor (Chris Hemsworth) will soon inherit... Read More

categories Features, Cinematical