I'm really sorry if this journal entry comes around nerdy and fanboyish, but I don't want to stay silent anymore.
Whenever people, online critiques or not, talk about adaptations, they usually take some notice of the source material they are based on, mostly books.
They are aware of the changes, the studios made, and they state them out, but in the end, they don't really care about them, because every movie stands on its own. And they are right, because movies are a visual media, a project, in which a mass of people is involved, including a director, who has an own vision of the story and how it should be told, and a studio company, who has to deal carefully with its ressources while not displeasing the fans of the source material.
This especially makes adaptations a serious business, a difficult and unthankful task.
However, I've got the feeling, that often fans of the source material are not really welcome anymore in discussions about the adaptations. I've got the feeling especially in regard of the Tolkien movies by Peter Jackson.
I don't want to harp on Jackson, because I think he did actually a good job with "The Lord of the Rings", staying true to some aspects of the story while also reaching for a general audience. It was the best adaptation we could hope for. But besides this, I think the movie had unfortunate side effects, including the divide of the fan base. Some people are reasonable and enjoy the movie AND the book, both in their respective way. But there also are some people who love the movie, but got to hate the book, calling it boring and unprofessional, pointing out every one of the details Tolkien got wrong, even pleading for a more complex and continuous version of the story in The Hobbit, and making fun of in their eyes "purist" fans of the book.
And that's something that bothered me the last days. I don't want the reading society to become an annoyance - a burden, who get ridiculed for their love of books and stories. I have read my entire life, I'm fascinated by life stories and tales in every possible medium. So I don't even take part in campaigns that defend reading against the growing influence of computers and TV, because I think every medium can be a gateway for growing as a person or merely for entertainment.
But that doesn't mean I don't care for the book - it is a far more difficult medium to consume, it just speaks to one of your senses, and it can take some time to finish.
A book is also more or less an one-human-project (not counting the editor and publisher), so in the end, the author has more creative control, but also more responsibility.
Made even more difficult, whenever the author isn't professional (which means that he or she worked not as a journalist or got some education in the literary process) and decides to give something deeply personal in the story. That was the case for John Ronald Reuel Tolkien or Stephenie Meyer.
Both made extremely conservative decisions to tell some parts of their story, and they get shunned for it.
But can you really blame them for trying it? It was their attempt to share something they held close to heart with their readers - something for which most other authors get praise.
And that's something I want to be kept untouched. Regardless if you like a book, find it boring or simply don't care - don't be a dick and show the readers some respect for wanting their enjoyment kept untouched.
And, on the other hand, don't let them undermine your love for a movie either.
Just let each other enjoy your media, talk about why you like or dislike something and don't think of each other as a bad person!
Unless you give them a reason by acting like a douchebag - then all hate against you!