Like the movies, series annoy a little the fans of the books of which they are inspired

Adapting a book to the screen necessarily entails taking some liberties. This does not fail to elicit some criticism from those who have read the books.

Game Of Thrones
Readers of George RR Martin’s “A Song of Ice and Fire” saga can not help it. Of what? To emphasize the fact that the series that is cartooning now, and for a while now, is moving away more and more from the original story. The characters killed prematurely or completely invented, no Lady Stoneheart (I say no more on this character in case) or the plot of Dorne after the death of Oberyn … Knowing that the series has now sold books and Continues its own way, there’s way that it leaves very far. The spectators will still be like eggs, that’s for sure, it will not change.
The Man in the High Castle
In science fiction, if you like to read, Philip K. Dick remains one of the bosses. All his books make you slap, and inspiration can only give that a surprising and original audiovisual work. After that, you have to do it, which is a great challenge. Difficulty recognized by the showrunner , too. Differences from the book? The series focuses on the story for the New York symbolic and crazy images, adds hateful Nazis at will (or Kido Inspector John Smith), invents a sister Juliana to give more importance to what she had begin.
You obviously remember the complicated relationship between Toby and Spencer? This subject kept you in suspense, you talked so many times. And bah in the book, you do not find that. Toby never hits Spencer. On the other hand, he lived a brief history with Emily, struck his sister being young and would die of overdose from the first volume of the novel. Another diff ‘, Alyson was targeted by a conspiracy, which is not found at all on the screen.
Outlander
When you base yourself on a novel, you are constrained and forced to shorten, concentrate events, condense intrigue. Unless you swing a saga of ten 8-hour films. At the risk of scaring 99.9% of the spectators or playing with the health of those who will try the blow. Thus, the relationship between Jamie and Claire is not as developed as in the first book of Diana Gabaldon . And season 2 does not start at the same time as the second book, in order to make the story more powerful, more comprehensible, under the advice of the novelist for the blow. Like what, it is not only bad will on the part of filmmakers.
The basis remains the same: one is 100 years after a large-scale nuclear accident. Apart from that, the differences are multiple and those knowing the book and the series tends rather for the second once is not customary. A little less focused on young adult disorders or romantic relationships, the series rather give more importance to deeper themes as our ability to survive in such a scenario and deliver a moral history of our species.
It was the reference among the teenage series, and in a justified way. Pleasant to watch, fun, the series perfectly meets the expectations of its audience. Maybe even too much, in the sense that the creators have made any softer, more superficial than in the book . Everyone is beautiful, cared for, dark elements or tension creators (like the bad character of Serena) are ignored: Cecily von Ziegesar had to see something other than her book at times.
Good and not so good. Or else regret and understanding. For example, season 1 could have been quite different. While Dexter ends up killing “The Ice Truck Killer”, in the book the latter gets out and continues to fuck the brothel at regular intervals in history. Maybe hot to manage level script ‘. On the other hand, the fact that Dexter asks himself if he is not himself this serial killer – supposing that he becomes another during his absence and has no recollection of it – was really stylish and we would have liked to see . Good initiative of the series, let’s recognize it: to give a much more important role to Angel Batista. Do you have other examples of a little (too) different series of books?