I apologize for the eclecticity of the books that I review, but what the hell, they're good and my whole intent is to generate interest in them. If I review stuff you've read then what the hell good am I?

That having been said, my feeling on adaptations is that the vast majority of GENRE adaptations are crap, whereas the majority of PERIOD adaptations (Dangerous Liaisons, Age of Innocence, Last of the Mochicos) are done well, as are works of 'serious literature' (the English Patient, the Talented Mr. Bungle). But just because that is what has gone on before I do not believe that it HAS to continue in that vein.
Will it? In all probability yes, but I would like to believe that there is a young director out there who will treat King's 'Desperation' right, and one who could make 'Fear Nothing' magical. (By the way, I caught 'Phantoms' on cable and liked it, in the same way that I liked the 80s remake of 'The Blob' and Gabrielle Anwar's 'Body Snatchers'...kind of guiltily)
Bottom line is this: I don't wanna see ANY book that I review turned into a BAD movie. Bibliophile that I am, if they're gonna be brought to the screen I want it done faithfully, and not to the picture that I have in MY mind for them, but in the spirit of the author's original intent and 'voice' if you will. 'Last of the Mohicans', changed from the book though it was, definitely fell into the category of a faithful retelling, because it still had the feel of Cooper's story and characters. The movie, done with reverence, can now stand in for the book even WITH its altered portions and still call itself by the same name.
Anyhoo. More responses, folks, keep 'em coming, make me fell the love.