Home
Posted By: 8SNAKE Lone Survivor book vs movie - 07/02/14
Curious to hear input from people who have read and watched Lone Survivor.

I read the book before watching the movie and felt somewhat disappointed by the movie. For one, the movie really glossed over some of the biggest struggles Marcus had to endure between the initial battle and his discovery by the Afghan villagers. Another was some huge discrepancies between the book and movie. I was under the impression that Luttrell was heavily involved in the movie's production. If so, I have no idea how some key elements were so badly butchered up. (I'm intentionally leaving out specific details because I don't want to spoil it for anyone who hasn't seen the movie or read the book.)
Posted By: Paul_C Re: Lone Survivor book vs movie - 07/02/14
Yeah, movie really compressed the events post "battle".....made it seem like only one day until he was rescued whereas I believe it was several days and several moves around.
Book was much more intense than the movie I thought.
The final "Battle" in the village left me shaking my head. I bought the book shortly after it came out and had read it a number of times prior to watching the movie, and while I enjoyed the movie, it was a pale shadow of what the book described. Luttrell not only was involved in the production, he was one of the operators in the movie.
The way Deitz and Murphy died in the movie was not even close to how it was portrayed in the book (Deitze especially was done a disservice in his portrayal in the movie IMO). Tho' I do have to say that Axe came off well in both versions. Axelson is the one team member I would like to read/hear more about, he made the Taliban pay dearly for his life.
There's a movie (documentary?) out on Murphy that I very much wanna see as well.
I thought the movie was pretty good.
(Remember that the movie was based on the book, not a documentary.)
That being said, it lost alot because of the ending, not even remotely close. Recommend reading the book either before or after the movie.
Posted By: SCRUBS Re: Lone Survivor book vs movie - 07/02/14
Like the others have said, the book is better than the movie. They could have done a better jod with casting imho.
I just started on the book. The movie can wait.
I know Marcus Luttrell slightly, know one of his brothers very well. He, Marcus, said his involvement in the movie was just to say yes or no when they asked him a question and then the writers/directors ignored what ever answer he gave them.
Posted By: dale06 Re: Lone Survivor book vs movie - 07/02/14

Agree, the book was better. I read it before the movie.
I had the privilege to hear Marcus tell his story in person last week. I had not read the book or seen the movie so I got it straight from the horse's mouth. Marcus talked about the movie some. His biggest criticism of the movie was that it's just hard to fit everything into a 2 hour block. He did say that they changed or hollywooded a few things but overall he was ok with the movie. He was very impressed with the stuntman who worked the movie. He said asked one of them that was about to jump off a cliff what his plan was. The guy told him I'm about to jump off this cliff and try not to die. Marcus told him he was crazy. The guy looked at him and said " you jumped off cliffs like this didn't you?" Marcus told him yes, but I was being shot at. He said when the guy jumped he broke his wrist or something but he was back at work the next day.
Posted By: jmillo Re: Lone Survivor book vs movie - 07/02/14
I read the book when it first came out, saw the movie and just read the book again. The book stirred my emotions and captivated me, not so much with the movie. I'll read the book again and again, but could care less if I see the movie again.
Posted By: Lonny Re: Lone Survivor book vs movie - 07/02/14
Book was good. Movie was just okay which is a shame since they didn't need to Hollywood it up to make for a good story.
Posted By: eh76 Re: Lone Survivor book vs movie - 07/02/14
Originally Posted by minnmarcus
Book was much more intense than the movie I thought.


Agreed
Watched the movie first and then read the book. The book is a must, movie pales in comparison.
I didn't care for the book that much, but I understand it. I could have skipped all the words on seal training and how bad they are etc... I was already aware of that.

But the actual battle read in the book was detailed IMHO.

The movie not so much. Of course how long did it take me to read the book? And what do you compress into a short movie?

Plus, as always, you have to make it for the masses... which I hate... fluff here and there so to speak. LIke any of the "reality" shows out there today.

Bottom line, I think it did a fair job as a movie, but they are never realistic, many folks would not watch that, especially the waiting, day and night, thats boring, so none would stand for it.
I understand they have to change things for the movie but why did they have to make up stuff. The battle at the village never happened. They did not attack the village because they needed the village people�s support and the elder of that area was much respected so they could not go against him. At the end when Marcus coded was stupid. Why did they make that up? He never coded. Their story is incredible without making those two things up. Like Marcus said God was looking after him and it was a miracle that he survived. His rifle to end with him after every fall off a cliff is a miracle in itself. What a story of survival.
made up because the majority of folks won't watch it unless its drama all the way...

Me, I'd like to see things as they actually were. Not trumped up.

And this one would not have been boring, to me, but it would to masses....IMHO.
I took the book along on a long International flight earlier this year and the movie was available on the flight as well. I had time to read the book and then immediately watch the film. I like many others enjoyed the book more than the movie. I ended up reading the book again on the return flight a few days later. The book is a great read and gives a much better account of the events than what they could possibly do with a two hour movie. I do wish they had stayed more with the facts in regards to the ending.
Not sure why this is a surprise. Book is always better.
Posted By: 8SNAKE Re: Lone Survivor book vs movie - 07/03/14
Originally Posted by AlaskaHippie
The way Deitz and Murphy died in the movie was not even close to how it was portrayed in the book (Deitze especially was done a disservice in his portrayal in the movie IMO).


Dietz's death in the movie was a disgrace. I'm surprised Luttrell didn't beat the director to death after seeing how Dietz and Murphy died in the movie. Especially Dietz, because it gave the impression that Luttrell left him behind (knowing he was still alive) while falling back from the Taliban.
I read the book long before the movie came out.

I had feelings come out with both.
My wife will not read the book nor watch the movie because of what our son does for a living.
She will not watch a show about seal training ether.

It would hurt to much for her to do so.
© 24hourcampfire