But, I ask why some people in various internet forum boards, not just this one, dislike the movie so much that they would prefer not to know that Annie Proulx wrote the original short story. She never expected anyone to want to write a screenplay adaptation of it.
See, their logic doesn't make sense to me either. (You're talking about forums like IMDB right?)
What did you think was a major change in the movie? The only changes, off the top of my head, were how we never saw Jack telling Ennis of how Jack's dad used to beat him (or the flashback to that). (I admit, I kind of wish that was in the movie.) The motel scene was longer in the book but the movie showed the rest of that conversation up on Brokeback.
In the book they never went back to Brokeback; in the movie, they did. (See, I think that works really well
both ways for different, symbolic reasons.) And Ennis in the book was more expressive than Ennis in the movie.
And some of those beautiful, touching endearments in the book like "little darlin'" were scrapped. Malheureusement...
I guess I don't consider them to be major changes because I recall details from Harry Potter books being altered or how A Little Princess has a completely different resolution in the book, apparently (that Alfonso Cuaron!), and Valentine, the crappy movie, was changed a lot from it's original source, which is pretty decent so far (I'm almost done).
P.S. The moustache has grown on me. I think it works to the filmmakers' advantage in aging Jack.
I was actually, when reading the book, blown away at how faithful the film was to it's source.