The Maze Runner Movies (1 and 2) [Spoilers!]

Welcome to Films and Books Forum, the place to chat about movies, post movie reviews, compare a book to its film adaptation, discuss what makes a good book-to-film adaptation, and suggest books which you think would make a great movie adaption.
User avatar
Previous Member of the Month
Posts: 572
Joined: 20 Aug 2015, 20:10
2018 Reading Goal: 25
2017 Reading Goal: 25
2018 Reading Goal Completion: 112
2017 Reading Goal Completion: 64
Currently Reading: A Game of Thrones
Bookshelf Size: 612
Reviewer Page:
Latest Review: A Price of Blood by Renee Peters and Rae Stilwell

Re: The Maze Runner Movies (1 and 2) [Spoilers!]

Post by katiesquilts » 11 Apr 2017, 18:24

I feel like the other person here who wasn't impressed with the books...

I watched the first movie, read the first book, and then watched the second movie in that order. Still haven't read any of the other books and not really planning to, since I thought the whole telepathy thing was a cheap cop-out with no plausible explanation. I also enjoyed the second movie a lot because I had no idea what was going to happen, and no idea what was going through everyone's heads.

Honestly, because they were so different, I kind of thought that the author regretted some of the things he wrote and okayed the changes in the movie because they actually made more sense?...

Posts: 687
Joined: 27 Feb 2015, 21:49
Favorite Author: Stephenie Meyer
Favorite Book: Twilight and The Last Song
Currently Reading: Bluewater Walkabout
Bookshelf Size: 717
Reviewer Page:
Latest Review: "Book Blueprint" by Jacqui Pretty
fav_author_id: 2594

Post by csimmons032 » 01 May 2017, 08:38

I only watched the first movie and read the first book. To be honest I didn't really care for either one. I found it to be a little bit boring, and through about half of the book, I had a difficult time following what was going on. So it was just a little confusing to me.
Latest Review: "Book Blueprint" by Jacqui Pretty

User avatar
Posts: 328
Joined: 01 Jul 2017, 20:47
Currently Reading: Homeport
Bookshelf Size: 129
Reviewer Page:
Latest Review: "Temptation Trials Part II" by B. Truly

Post by ebethina » 10 Nov 2017, 19:35

I hate it when I read a good book and the movie or tv show ruins it by not following it. That's why if at all possible I try to read the book first. However, there have been times the ending of the book ruins the movie. The movie was better.
Latest Review: "Temptation Trials Part II" by B. Truly

User avatar
Posts: 1
Joined: 29 Dec 2017, 13:53
Currently Reading:
Bookshelf Size: 3

Post by akosa » 29 Dec 2017, 13:56

I sooo love the film....perfect cast for each role...

User avatar
Posts: 415
Joined: 07 Jan 2018, 20:30
2018 Reading Goal: 50
2018 Reading Goal Completion: 36
Favorite Author: Marissa Meyer
Favorite Book: <a href=" ... 46410">The Wendy</a>
Currently Reading: Cinder
Bookshelf Size: 34
Reviewer Page:
Latest Review: Samuel by Samuel kidstar
fav_author_id: 2388

Post by SPasciuti » 11 Jan 2018, 16:26

seeker19 wrote:
22 Dec 2016, 18:06
There are way too many movie adaptations that have left me seriously disappointed. It is understandable that all the dialogue, plot points, and descriptions cannot be included in the short 2 hour time frame that movies typically are. But, movies that change the entire plot of the book just baffle me. Why would you take a perfectly good book that is loved by its fans and change it completely? How is that a smart idea for a successful movie?

There are some adaptations that I've liked such as the Harry Potter movies and the Hunger Games movies. But there are too many that left more to be desired. One such movie series is the Maze Runner movie and the second one, the Scorch Trials. The first movie, the Maze Runner, I was actually okay with. I was even able to overlook the fact that they changed the entire method of how the Gladers escaped the maze. It was close enough to the code and the griever hole in the book that I could forgive them since it was still one of the better movie adaptations I had seen.

I should have known it wouldn't last. From the first scene, they CHANGED the ENTIRE PLOT! In the book, they are safe after they escape the maze for like one day, but then they find out that they were actually in the second phase of the experiment and had to cross the Scorch to reach the next destination. In the movie, they basically ignored the plot and created an entirely new problem with some weird lab facility and experiments. In the book there were only the Gladers in the facility, and then they see the new kid Aris. In the movie, they are suddenly with dozens of other kids who were in a similar maze?!! And then they just randomly escape into the Scorch and try to reach a "safe haven" that they've heard about? And also, in both movies, what happened to telepathic communication between Theresa and Thomas?!! I cannot fathom why you would change a perfectly good plot that was working, what is the point?

Anyways, as you can tell, I am really mad about these movies. In fact, I was so annoyed with it that I stopped watching it about half way into the movie. Maybe it improved later on but I just couldn't watch another minute of it. Well that's was the end of my rant. This was my first post in the forum so let me know if I'm doing it wrong lol. What are your thoughts on the movie? Did you like it or hate it? Did you want to pull your hair out while watching it?
My feelings exactly. This is one of those things where I was entirely happy with the changes made in the first movie because they sort of just made sense in the long run seeing as it would've been fairly difficult to portray the escape the way the book did. And I remember coming out of the theater being really impressed with how they'd adapted it.

Cue the second movie and it was just a giant disaster. Everything they could have done wrong, they did. Not to mention the fact that they completely destroyed one of the reasons I was so utterly in love with the book series. I just...the diseased people were not zombies. They didn't have this weird thing eating their stomachs. The disease had deteriorated their brains and made them crazy. And I don't understand how the movie writers messed up so badly with this? They basically took the one really unique idea about the diseased people and tore it up until it was utterly unrecognizable.

It was massively disappointing.

And, unfortunately, I couldn't even enjoy the ending because it just wasnt as good as the book had been. I personally don't think you missed out on much when you stopped watching.

Alternately, I don't think I'll watch the third movie when it comes out (is it out already? I've forgotten). I just don't think it'll live up to the level that it should after they botched the second one. Which is a shame because I adore Dylan O'Brien.

User avatar
Kathryn Price
Posts: 78
Joined: 18 Dec 2017, 16:14
2018 Reading Goal: 100
2018 Reading Goal Completion: 17
Currently Reading:
Bookshelf Size: 271
Reviewer Page:
Latest Review: Rethinking Possible by Rebecca Faye Smith Galli

Post by Kathryn Price » 12 Jan 2018, 14:08

I thought the first Maze Runner movie was better than the second, though I don't think they were ruined. Percy Jackson was much worse. I am of the opinion that as long as the spirit of the books stay the same, some liberties can be taken with the characters and story without destroying the adaptation (e.g. LOTR and Hobbit trilogies). As a general rule, though, the closer to the original, the better, though there are some exceptions. The Hunger Games, Harry Potter, and Tolkien's works are extremely good, in my opinion, and though Maze Runner isn't quite that caliber, I don't think they're terrible.
"If we find ourselves with a desire that nothing in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that we were made for another world." - C.S. Lewis

Posts: 63
Joined: 08 Jan 2018, 11:20
Bookshelf Size: 15
Reviewer Page:
Latest Review: "Twisted Threads" by Kaylin McFarren

Post by Annamikov » 13 Jan 2018, 12:05

Honestly, the Maze Runner had a huge potential and the first movie was normal, however in the end, I realized that there are too many plot holes and missing details. It feels as if the author tried to throw in every element in the book - zombies, mazes, monsters, different girl groups who try to kill the main group, and etc. I think it would be better if he picked one setting, and stuck to it. The second movie is fully different, it's not even about running in mazes anymore.
Latest Review: "Twisted Threads" by Kaylin McFarren

Post Reply

Return to “Films and Books”