Total Nerd Fantastic Sci-Fi Stories You Love That Were Ruined By Their Utterly Terrible Movie Versions  

John Saavedra
3.4k votes 733 voters 47.1k views 14 items

List Rules Vote up the worst sci-fi live-action adaptations of all time.

Science fiction is a genre of big ideas. Unfortunately, Hollywood can't always emulate those ideas on the big screen as producers, filmmakers, executives, financiers, and all the other grubby little mitts in the fray try to meet the demands of ratings, entertainment value, run-time constrictions, screenwriting conventions, technological limitations, and the complex task of turning written language into visual language. Because of this, there are ambitious and seminal sci-fi books with bad movies hung around their necks like an iron albatross. From David Lynch's Dune to the Brad Pitt-produced World War Z, there are almost too many great sci-fi stories with terrible film adaptations to enumerate. 

Many of the worst sci-fi movie adaptations were doomed from the start, as was the case with 2017's Ghost in the Shell, which cast a white woman in a traditionally Asian role. The Dark Tower adaptation from the same year remixed the events of the books so shamelessly, the film didn't even resemble Stephen King's book series. 

Not all of the movie's on this list of great sci-fi stories with terrible film adaptations showed advanced warning signs of impending awfulness. Some were passion projects, such as the aforementioned Dune, which jumped from the hands of the mad auteur Alejandro Jodorowsky to the even madder David Lynch, for what could have been the greatest sci-fi movie ever made. Alas, it failed. Just like the rest of the film adaptations on this list.

1 281 VOTES

The Dark Tower VII: The Dark T... is listed (or ranked) 1 on the list Fantastic Sci-Fi Stories You Love That Were Ruined By Their Utterly Terrible Movie Versions
Photo:  Sony Pictures

Nothing makes a fan community angrier than filmmakers taking their favorite work of fiction and completely changing it. The Dark Tower movie, which is based on Stephen King's eight-book magnum opus, remixes events, characters, and places to tell a SparkNotes version of the massive story in a little over 80 minutes. The way the movie simplifies portions of the plot to add ill-advised action sequences involving tons of guns and magic wasn't welcome by the audience either. 

The Dark Tower books tell the story of Roland Deschain, the last gunslinger, who is on a quest to reach the titular tower before the evil Crimson King can tear it down and destroy reality, creating a universe of chaos over which he can rule over. Along the way, Roland gathers a group of companions, including little Jake Chambers, to accompany him on his journey and fight alongside him. 

While Roland and Jake meet in the movie, their relationship is distilled to the gunslinger protecting the boy from Walter Padick, the villain from the first book in the series, The Gunslinger, who needs Jake to bring down the Tower. The movie makes Jake the main character, pushing Roland to the side, while turning Walter (Matthew McConaughey) into a cheesy wizard with telekinetic powers. Roland and Walter's climactic fight, which plays out like a bad scene from The Matrix, is truly painful to watch. 

The Dark Tower seriously under performed at the box office, making a little over $100 million, a very poor performance for a would-be blockbuster. Plus everyone hated it. 

Also Ranked

#22 on The All-Time Greatest Works of Stephen King

#43 on Famous Novels With The Catchiest First Lines

#9 on The Best Fantasy Book Series

#30 on Other Books Game of Thrones (ASOIAF) Fans Will Love

205 76
Was this a bad adaptation?
see more on The Dark Tower VII: The Dark Tower
2 364 VOTES

Ghost in the shell is listed (or ranked) 2 on the list Fantastic Sci-Fi Stories You Love That Were Ruined By Their Utterly Terrible Movie Versions
Photo:  Paramount Pictures

Paramount's live action adaptation of the beloved manga series and top 10 GOAT anime films Ghost in the Shell was doomed from the start. Public reaction to Scarlett Johansson's casting as Japanese main character Major Motoko Kusanagi was so negative it's no wonder the movie underperformed, making a mere $170 million internationally. The whitewashing controversy followed the movie throughout production, turning the release of Ghost in the Shell into a PR nightmare.

An interesting footnote to the the controversy is that Ghost in the Shell is about consciousness, and how much of humanity and identity is defined by mind versus by body. Consciousness is devoid of race - minds in the source material can be placed into shell bodies of any race or gender. The notion of a non-white mind placed into the body of a young white women is potentially very interesting, but was unexplored. 

It didn't help the movie that it didn't follow the source material, attempting to explain Johansson's casting through a convoluted plot twist about anti-augmentation radicals. The movie also changes the central villain from the enigmatic Puppet Master to Hideo Kuze, who is revealed to be someone from the Major's past, a radical fighting against the evil robotics company responsible for the growing trend of cybernetic augmentations. 

In the end, the movie's plot lacks the intrigue of the original story. While it attempts to discuss issues of identity central to the source material, it never fully digs in. Instead, it goes all in on the action and (beautiful) visuals. 

Also Ranked

#1 on The Best Cyberpunk Manga of All Time

229 135
Was this a bad adaptation?
see more on Ghost in the shell
3 224 VOTES

The Time Machine is listed (or ranked) 3 on the list Fantastic Sci-Fi Stories You Love That Were Ruined By Their Utterly Terrible Movie Versions
Photo:  DreamWorks Pictures

HG Wells, one of the forefathers of the science fiction genre, brought the idea of time travel to the masses in his 1895 novel The Time Machine, which presents a vision of Earth almost 800,000 years in the future. The book's unnamed Time Traveler discovers the planet is populated by utopian, human-like Eloi and underground-dwelling, ape-like Morlocks. Upon his arrival, the latter group steal his time machine, leaving him stranded. The Time Traveler must fight the Morlocks to get back home.

Director Simon Wells, HG's great-grandson, and screenwriters John Logan and David Duncan, stick to the story for the most part in their 2002 adaptation, but flesh out the protagonist, giving him a name (Dr. Alexander Hartdegen, played by Guy Pearce) and a purpose beyond a thirst for knowledge. The movie is basically a time-traveling love story about Hartdegen trying to save his fiancee from death. It's a noble effort to develop the characters, but it ultimately falls short, as the adventure becomes tonally unbalanced once Hartdegen reaches the Eloi and the Morlocks, and the film turns into an action movie. 

The film is a shallow effort overstuffed with a love plot that feels more tacked on than the vital arc of the movie. As Jeff Strickler of the Minneapolis Star Tribune said in his review, "If HG Wells had a time machine and could take a look at his kin's reworked version, what would he say? 'It looks good, Sonny, but you missed the point.'"

Also Ranked

#48 on The Best Novels Ever Written

#32 on The Top Must-Read Books of All-Time

#44 on 35+ Books Everybody Lies About Reading

#6 on The Greatest Science Fiction Novels of All Time

144 80
Was this a bad adaptation?
see more on The Time Machine
4 276 VOTES

World War Z is listed (or ranked) 4 on the list Fantastic Sci-Fi Stories You Love That Were Ruined By Their Utterly Terrible Movie Versions
Photo:  Paramount Pictures

Max Brooks's World War Z might just be the best book about zombies ever. Written as a UN report chronicling the events of humanity's struggle to survive a zombie outbreak, World War Z goes deeper than any other work of zombie fiction. It tackles the socio-political, religious, and environmental effects the outbreak has on the planet, while showing how real-world tactics and alliances might play out were the zombie apocalypse to arrive. It's a brilliant book that turns zombie stories into a serious discussion. 

It's also damn near impossible to adapt, as Brad Pitt and his myriad producing partners and screenwriters learned the hard way. The main problem? The book has no central character. Rather, it uses numerous accounts around the world that form a complete picture of the outbreak and its aftermath.  

The movie gives us Gerry Lane (Pitt), a former UN operative/commando dude with lots of guns. Lane must travel around the world to find the source of the outbreak and help scientists find a cure. Along the way, Lane faces increasingly ridiculous zombie situations. The movie introduces the idea that zombies can climb on top of each other to reach basically any height (it's dumb). The movie has basically nothing to do with the book, and faced huge production problems that required shooting an entirely different third act months after filming wrapped. 

Pretty much anything you might love about the book is not in the movie, other than zombies. 

Also Ranked

#61 on The Scariest Novels of All Time

#41 on The Best Satirical Novels

#76 on NPR's Top 100 Science Fiction & Fantasy Books

166 110
Was this a bad adaptation?
see more on World War Z