Gah.

What does it? What makes someone go to all the trouble of getting the rights to dramatise a bestselling book only to change the story beyond all recognition? At what point do they think "I know this book sold ga-jillions, but what the plot should actually do is this instead, that's much better"? Was quite looking forward to the new Rebus the other night, despite being a John Hannah fan; was even willing to overlook the fact that Siobhan looked disconcertingly like Cully Barnaby from Midsomer Murders. Within a few seconds it was a case of "eh? don't remember that. why's she called that instead? and where's half the plot gone and why's what's left wrong?". Plus, taking out what they did, it being called 'The Falls' now made no sense at all. I shall, of course, watch the other one. But I reserve the right to whinge about it afterwards.

Have also just read Sahara by Clive Cussler, which the film, er, Sahara was based on. And I get the impression that if I'd read the book first, I'd have been similarly narked with the film, given that a good half of the plot is completely taken out and what's left is fannied about with. I still like the film though. I even think bits of it are better than the book. But if I'd read it first, I bet I wouldn't think that.