Zack Snyder Quotes

I know a movie and a book are two different things and you are going do different media in different ways. No author can want a movie to be exactly like the book because then it will be a bad movie.

All I can say is that I am not one of those writers who want 100% of their book in the film. I recognize that film is a different medium and the filmmaker must have the right to bring some new elements to the table, provided the soul of the book is preserved.

Particularly when you're making a movie of a book, people are always waiting with their knives - you know?

A movie is not a book. If the source material is a book, you cannot be too respectful of the book. All you owe to the book is the spirit.

I'd like to think that my films are personal enough to exist without hearkening back to their respective novels.

You either ignore the comic book and make a great movie or you stay very close to the comic book.

I don't hold with the notion that only bad books make good movies.

Oh, filmmakers, please don't take my soft book and turn it into a horror, or take my horror and make it soft.

The challenge with 'Watchmen' is making sure that the ideas that were in the book got into the movie. That was my biggest stretch. I wanted people to watch the movie and get it. It's one of those things where, over time, it has happened more.

I'm a huge Cormac McCarthy fan and have read every book of his.

As an author, you can't expect a movie to be an illustration of the book. If that's what you hope for, you shouldn't sell the rights.

Authors of books are not given very much control over the films that are made from their books.

I think successful movies that are based on books are their own thing. I think if you're too faithful, word by word, character trait to character trait, it can hurt the movie.

People think, 'Oh, well how can 'The Hobbit,' which is one book, become three films?' But you can take one line from an appendice and it turns into a whole sequence.

I don't tend to be a nitpicker when I'm watching movies, so as long as something is true to the spirit of the original, that's very much what we got for. You try to never do something that the original author wouldn't have done themselves.

Any good piece of material like Shakespeare ought to be open to reinterpretation.

I think my background in film taught me that a great book adaptation is not always slavishly faithful to the source material.

It is customary for the writer to sneer that Hollywood has traduced their book. Well, I adore my film.

There will be the 5% on the fringe of any hardcore fanbase that get angry about any change you make to the source material. The truth is that novels, games, comics, and what-have-you are not usually ready to be slapped up on screen as-is.

You take some creative license when you make a movie, and things can be a little bit different.

I always felt once it goes into movie land, the book belongs to someone else.

I think comics can be the basis for great films, but I think the focus of such a project should be on making the film as good as possible, not on painstakingly replicating the comic.

You're not doing the scene exactly the way it is in the book [The Hunger Games], but the intention of the scene is there.

I think Miss Moore was right to cut "The Steeple-Jack" - the poem seems plainer and clearer in its shortened state but she has cut too much... The reader may feel like saying, "Let her do as she pleases with the poem; it's hers, isn't it?" No; it's much too good a poem for that, it long ago became everybody's, and we can protest just as we could if Donatello cut off David's left leg.

I think everybody is allowed, especially when they're telling a story, as long as it's not based on somebody's real life, you're allowed a certain liberty.