I'll start this post with the requisite SPOILER ALERT for those of you who haven't seen this weekend's weepy cancer-centric Jodi Picoult adaptation. But for those of you who have, you might understand why faithful devotees of the novel are outraged by the Nick Cassavetes-directed film. Outraged enough that at one point, fans even started a Facebook group called "Save My Sister's Keeper!!"
So what's the big deal? Why, the film adaptation boasts a completely different ending than the book. Though the book ends on a somber note, killing off a character in an unexpected manner, the movie takes on a decidedly more Hollywood-esque ending, keeping said character alive. Even Picoult herself felt iffy about the change: "Having the ending changed would certainly not have been my choice. Iwrote the ending very intentionally because I wanted to leave thereader with a certain message. And changing that ending changes thatmessage. However, I am excited to see the movie and to judge it on itsstrengths."
Now, screenwriter Jeremy Leven wouldn't be the only scriptwriter who has taken liberties with book adaptations. Even Peter Jackson, the writer/director obsessed with staying faithful to J.R.R. Tolkien's Lord of the Rings saga, condensed and added new material to his film. But it's a bold move to change an entire ending of an adaptation, especially considering that Picoult's novel boasts such a large following.
So if you were Leven, PopWatchers, would you have changed the ending in the film? For those of you who have seen it, were you happy with the bold choice, or would you have preferred the movie to have stayed 100 percent faithful? And what's the most egregious change you've ever seen in an adaptation?
More on My Sister's Keeper:
My Sister's Keeper: Lisa Schwarzbaum's movie review
Nick Cassavetes: 'I changed The Notebook's ending, too'
My Sister's Keeper: EW's review of the novel (2004)
Comments (1-30) of 372 Add your comment
I can understand the fans reaction- when I saw the Horse Whisperer I was BEYOND FURIOUS with Redford for ruining the ending of the book- an ending, I might add, which is the single time I have EVER cried in reading a book- and it ruined the movie for me. I understood his reasoning for the changes and I respected where he was coming from, but it took me a long time to be able to watch the movie again and appreciate it because I was so upset at the changes. Even now, I watch the movie right up til the part that I know is WRONG and then turn it off. On the other hand, I know directors have a vision and we need to understand its not ours.
I read the book and enjoyed it up until the ending, which I thought was a cop-out that completely avoided the moral dilemma at the heart of the story. So if the screenwriter’s change actually confronts the issue and forces the girl to make a choice, then I’m all for it.
Anna did have to make a choice. Or did you not read the book? She chose to not help her sister medically to help her emotionally. She chose to stand by and let her sister die even though she knew she could help, so that Kate was no longer existing on the cusp of life and death. The girl only ever wanted to live and then when she finally has the chance she is killed, so cop-out? I don’t think so.
That sounds like a horrible change to me. I hate when hollywood feels like we can’t take the somber ending. Life is somber. People die.
http://tvdonewright.com/2009/06/26/tv-tonight-saturday-june-27th-2009/
Royalties? Don’t you mean liberties?
I am really disappointed that the ending was changed. What happened at the end of the book was so purposeful and made so much sense to me. The movie completely changed that, and not in a good way.
The performances were beautiful but that couldn’t make up for the fact that the film was about 20% faithful to the book. Not only did they change the ending but they took out the character Julia (who i thought was an important character), changed the character Jesse A LOT and turned Anna and Campbell into secondary characters (the film seemed to focus more on sarah and kate)also, they added a lot of things that just seemed really random. i think if i had not read the book, i would have really like the movie but i am glad that i have read the book coz it’s amazing.
The performances were beautiful but that couldn’t make up for the fact that the film was about 20% faithful to the book. Not only did they change the ending but they took out the character Julia (who i thought was an important character), changed the character Jesse A LOT and turned Anna and Campbell into secondary characters (the film seemed to focus more on sarah and kate)also, they added a lot of things that just seemed really random. i think if i had not read the book, i would have really like the movie but i am glad that i have read the book coz it’s amazing.
Well, since they allow spoilers here. Would someone please tell me the original ending?
I saw the movie and loved it. But I’m curious about the changes. Who died and why? What choice had to be made?
About the movie and/or book: what was the son doing late at night when he went into the city and hung out with like prostitutes and stuff? It’s never fully explained and I was wondering if someone could help me out?
Thanks
Hands down the worst film adaptation of a book is the film “Less Than Zero”. Bret Easton Ellis is my favorite author, and the movie completely changed the central theme of the story, and even the characters. The only little bright spot is Robert Downey Jr as Julian, but they still only got that character only half right. The film changed the main character from a jaded, coke sniffing rich kid into some sort of pseudo heroic wuss. One of the things that was so great about the book was Ellis’s ability to capture to the demoralization of a generation, and we were left without a resolution really. The film tries to assume and wrap up the story so perfectly and in a ‘Hollywood’ way, but the main character in the book never tried desperately to be the good guy or to save anybody’s life (as the film portrayed). No, he merely left unchanged and unaffected by the despair around him, which is a far better ending and depiction of Gen X.
Love the song at the end!! Jeff Buckley had such a beautiful voice!! NY tribute November 15, 2009 at Arlene’s Grocery!!
Changing the ending to a ‘happy’ one smacks of the old days of the Hollywood Studio system and the Hays Code, when married people never divorced, bad guys always got their due and they all lived happily ever after. Did the screenwriter and director not think we could handle a downer ending? I guess I just don’t understand the point of it. As for the commenter that wanted to know what happens in the book I suggest you read the book. It’s well worth your time.
I saw the movie yesterday. I think the movie changed enough from the book that using the original ending would not have made sense. The movie focused less on Anna suing her parents and more on the cancer itself. In fact, the story didn’t really center around Anna at all. So, I don’t think the original ending would have resonated as well in the story that they were trying to tell.
However, I think that the film should have been more true to the book all the way through, which would let the original ending make sense. Now it is just some weepy story made for the sole purpose of making the audience cry for two hours.
If I had not read the book before I saw the movie, than yes, the movie was good. However, having read the book prior to seeing the movie, I was expecting the same ending as in the book. The movie was a truly big disappointment because the essence of the story is Anna being her sister’s keeper!
Having read the book and hearing from others what the movie ending is I have to say I prefer the way the movie handles it. The ending of the book, to me, felt cheap and a cop out by Picoult. Her whole saga is about the girl with cancer, about her dying, and to do a twist where something unexpected occurs made me feel as if Picoult had no clue how to write the ending her book should have had and so she dropped the ball. If the movie fixes this then I am all for it.
i really storongly disliked the ending in the movie! I myself have read the book, and when reached the last 2 chapters was shocked. You dont really expect the main character to survive but if you go back to the 1st chapter you understand why she chose this ending. Anna was bron to save her sister’s life and like any important person she accoplished her porpose in life, and kate needed to live hers still. The ending to this novel is the reason why the book has touched soo many people and why the author is amazing and to change it was a big mistake. But on the other hand i went to seee the movie with friends who never read the book and they thought it was amazing, so if you havent read the book or watch the movie i suggest watching it 1st or you will be very disapointed!
I haven’t seen the movie but I didn’t like the ending of the book. I felt that the ending of the book was very abritrary and the explanation has a “ghost in the machine” feel. If the movie ending is more organic, then I applaud the change.
I meant “god in the machine”.
I think it’s ridiculous to change the ending of a perfectly good novel. That ending meant so much to me, and just like what the author said, to change that ending is to change the message the film conveys. I love the cast, the performance, everything, save for that ending. I was very disappointed and left the theater mad and frustrated instead. It’s the same thing that happened with The Notebook. I understand changing things a bit or leaving out characters to fit the film, but to completely change the ending? Why bother adapting a novel then? And now, another one of my favorite novel is going to be shown in theaters, The Time-Traveler’s Wife, and I’m scared to see it.
**SPOILER ALERT***
Evolution, in the book Anna is granted the medical emancipation and right before she’s about to reveal whether she’ll do a transplant or not she gets in a car accident and becomes brain dead. So the attorney gives the ok on the transplant and Kate survives.
Praise God the director decided to change the movie’s ending. Can we all agree that this world needs more awareness of CHILDHOOD CANCER? The facts are that 7 kids die EVERY DAY of this wretched disease; 47 more are diagnosed each day… the sad reality is that we are so consumed in other cancer researches and leave our precious children behind. I’m glad this movie brought truth to the hard reality that no one wants to see… CHILDHOOD CANCER IS REAL, AND KIDS ARE DYING! WHen Kate dies, the movie potrays the hard reality of what so many people are living. I’m sure that the majority of the people who watched this film didn’t even get so many TRUE details of childhood cancer. For instance, the childrens ports for medicine administration, the gold ribbon pins worn at her funeral, “AML” and “APL” types of leukemia and countless others. I recommend that everyone who thinks this movie was just another “movie motivated to make an audience cry for 2 hours” to count your blessings. Maybe the inention was to spread awareness of childhood cancer!
Well let’s not forget that the director, Nick Cassavetes, also changed the ending to The Notebook, upsetting fans like myself and eliminating the possibility of adapting the novel’s sequel, The Wedding. As much as the change upset me, I still loved the movie and I hope it will be the same with My Sister’s Keeper.
“Now, screenwriter Jeremy Leven wouldn’t be the only scriptwriter who has taken royalties with book adaptations.”
“Royalties”?
I think you meant to write “taken liberties with book adaptations.”
EW thank your for telling me this I was going to go see this moive. I LOVED this book it was amazing, but by not killing that one character off it ruins the whole point of this book. This is NOT a happy book its about love and loss and family. Total FAIL. EW you just saved me 20 bucks.
I just came from seeing the movie and enjoyed it, though I’ve never read the book. Now I’m curious to read it after seeing what really happens!
To whoever just said they’re scared to see The Time Traveler’s Wife film adaptation, I’m right there with you…
I ABSOLUTELY hated the book’s ending and am glad they changed it!!!
I saw the movie on opening night and was extraordinarily disappointed with the ending. A fan of the novel for years, I was thrilled with the faithfulness of the adaptation, and subsequently appalled at the switchup ending. I, too, left the theater angry and frustrated, as did my mother and my niece, whom I’d taken to see the adaptation of a novel we all loved. I sincerely hope that there is some chance that the intended ending was filmed and at least makes it to the DVD release.
When I heard that this story was being filmed, I wondered what was going to be done about the ending. I understand that the author received a lot of negative comments on it. I have to add my voice to those who say that the ending of the book was a complete cop out. I was so angry at it that I never wanted to read another book by the author. I felt that it completely dodged the issue at hand by having an unforseen circumstance completely change the direction of the story. The ethical questions raised were never answered. They didn’t need to be. But if the ending was the author’s intention, why change it? I always wonder why filmmakers feel the need to change a book they paid good money for. Why bother to film it in the first place?
The end of the book was shocking but I hated the change in the movie. It was an awful decision. Also hated seeing so little of Alec Baldwin. The Osterman weekend by Robert Ludlum was the absolute worst adaptation I have ever seen. He should have sued.
I saw the movie last night, and while I thought it was well done, I too had a problem with the ending. First of all,even if you prefer the movie’s ending, it still doesn’t make it right that they took someone’s work and completely bastardized it. If you’re going to make a movie out of a book, it is not fair to change the ending, which is a huge part of it, and the culmination of everything she wrote. Secondly, I loved the book’s ending – sure, it may seem out of nowhere, but that’s kind of the point. Life is short, and unpredictable. Sara spent her whole life trying to protect Kara from death and all it really takes is one random moment for it all to end. That’s the point, and with the book’s ending, it proves it. It’s beautiful and poignant and completely disappointing that Cassavetes disregarded it.
I loved the book. If you want to change the ending, just come up with your own ORIGINAL story and make that a movie. I think the book’s ending, although it is sad, is a reflection of life. Things don’t always happen the way we want them to. I haven’t seen the movie. I am afraid that Cameron Diaz won’t be good enough for the role. Can you play one of Jodi’s super-mom characters if you have no children of your own? I also just finished reading Handle With Care. Another great book from Jodi Picoult.
Although it’s already been said by Francesca, the part that felt most egregious about the adaptation was the shift in focus from Anna & Campbell (in the book) to Kate & Sara (in the film). A total under-utilization of Alec Baldwin and Abigail Breslin. I had seen Cameron Diaz on the Tonight Show Monday night, and expected that the ending was different from what she said about the film. I enjoyed the movie, but would have enjoyed it more had I not read the superior book. Thanks for giving us Jodi Picoult’s thoughts on the adaptation as well! Like others, I’m really looking forward to The Time Traveler’s Wife, and hope it is more faithful to the book than Her Sister’s Keeper was.