I suppose you might not hover over the link above long enough to see the popup that says "SPOILERS!" (For that matter, you might have a non-standards-compliant browser that doesn't show you the "title=" attribute of the link at all. Get Firefox.)
As I said both in response to your other comment and in my original post, the plot *is* different. And I'm glad of that, because I didn't like the original story (which I read right after seeing the movie) nearly as well. On the other hand, it's also incorrect to say that it has "nothing" to do with the Padgett story.
The more you insist that it is connected to the original story, the harder it is for me to appreciate it on its own merits, or even to allow grudgingly that it might have some on which to be appreciated.
As for not liking the original story…de gustibus and all that, I guess.
Are you familiar with the term "McGuffin?" (Not sure if that's how to spell it, though). It describes the relationship between the two (such as it is) pretty well; they use the same McGuffin. The other resemblances are more of motifs than anything else, and I can't get into them without spewing spoilers.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Belated warning
As for Cathy's suggestion that people should see the movie with as few preconceptions as possible…try to free yourself of the preconception that it has anything to do with the Padgett story on which it is ostensibly based. It might then be possible to like the movie; I'll never know.
Re: Belated warning
(no subject)
As for not liking the original story…de gustibus and all that, I guess.
(no subject)