My sister's keeper. Should they have changed the ending? spoilers

B

[[bubbles]]<3Aaron

New member
So I just watched this film that everyone was raving about.

Ok, so I liked it, good acting and everything. But I thought it was going to be a bit more than one of those movies where a kid dies of cancer. And she wasn't even supposed to die at all. That was supposed to be the twist at the end. That she lives and Anna dies.

It was a little too dieing of cancer related. It was meant to be about a child who was created for the purpose of cureing her dieing sister. But they had it so that the film was mostly based around the sister who had cancer.

Does anyone else think they should have at least kept the ending the same as the book.
 
I loved the film, but I agree the ending should never have been changed. Those people who hadn't read the book would've expected her to die of cancer and it would have been a much better twist to have it like the book.
 
I usually prefer the book to the films, but this time I liked the movie better. When I read the book I was so annoyed at the ending, I thought the author was just being completely lazy, having all the built up fight with Anna not wanting to be used, then to have her killed off and her kidneyt taken from her...what a cop out!

I think, as I'd read the book and didn't know that the ending had changed when I watched it, then I saw it as another 'twist' so was surprised, and of course cried!

But yeah, I thought the ending to the book was terrible, whilst the movie ending, though predicatable to someone who'd not read the book, was better.
 
Back
Top