Summary

• Omitting key characters in adaptations can lead to major plot holes and detract from world-building.
• Losing prominent characters like Kronos or Glorfindel can impact the essence of the original story.
• Failure to include characters like Adam Warlock or Lady Stoneheart can result in missed opportunities for storytelling depth.

It is impossible for any movie or TV adaptation to adapt every single detail from the original source to the new one. It is unrealistic, for example, to expect 100% of the complexity of the Dune books to be included in the Denis Villeneuve movies. However, sometimes, entire characters are omitted in the adaptation, which is a change on an entirely different level. Some minor characters may have to be cut just to keep the story simple enough to flesh out on screen, but sometimes these sacrifices don’t quite pay off.

Often, a movie or TV adaptation may be made worse off if a certain character isn’t in it. Whether their omission causes a lack of important context in the adaptation or just simply produces a massive plot hole, there are numerous examples of characters who failed to make the cut, and the adaptation paid the price. From the Wizarding World to Westeros, some of the most popular franchises in movie and TV history have been hurt as a result of cutting characters from the source material.

10 Kronos – Percy Jackson And The Lightning Thief

An Inexplicable Omission

Kronos, King of the Titans and the grandfather of Percy Jackson himself, is the overarching villain of the original book series written by Rick Riordan, with his presence being felt from the first book, Percy Jackson And The Lightning Thief. In the 2010 film adaptation, Kronos does not even get a mention in dialogue or exposition, let alone an onscreen appearance. In the book, Kronos manipulates the main antagonist, Luke Castellan, to steal Zeus’ lightning bolt, setting off the chain of events that kickstarts Percy’s story.

Omitting Kronos was a major mistake by the film-makers behind The Lightning Thief. Without Kronos, there was not only a major plot hole as to why Luke stole the lightning bolt but also a limit to the world-building on offer for viewers, which may have played a part in the movie’s disappointing reception. Such deviation from the source material was instrumental in bringing the Percy Jackson movie series down, with Riordan himself admitting to having very little influence over the production and not having watched either (via Rick Riordan).

9 Krillin – Dragonball Evolution

Krillin Plays a Crucial Role In The Franchise

Dragonball Evolution was an incredibly disappointing live-action adaptation of the Dragon Ball franchise, both critically and commercially. Of the criticisms leveled at the movie, one that stood out the most was its disloyalty to the source material: the Dragon Ball manga and two anime series. In particular, the movie’s failure to include Krillin, one of the most important characters in both the manga and anime, is one of Evolution‘s most significant deviations from the source material.

In the manga and anime, Krillin plays the crucial role of being Goku’s close friend, who guides him through coming to terms with his humanity. His omission in Evolution means that there is a lack of any true moral dynamic within the adaptation. Krillin being missing is just one example of the flawed approach filmmakers took when adapting Dragon Ball here. No true information about world-building or Goku’s friends is really explored in detail in Evolution, and this failure manifested itself in Krillin not even making it into the movie’s script.

8 Mr. and Mrs. Hurst – Pride and Prejudice (2005)

The Movie Suffers From A Lack Of Romantic Realism

The 2005 adaptation of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice is a beloved movie depicting the unlikely love story between Elizabeth Bennett (Keira Knightley) and Fitzwilliam Darcy (Matthew MacFadyen). However, one of its few flaws is its failure to include the minor characters of the Hursts. In the book, Mr. and Mrs. Hurst have an unhappy marriage, with Mr. Hurst written as a very ungentlemanly man with “more fashion than fortune,” while his wife, Louisa, has a not-so-hidden affection for Mr. Darcy himself.

Removing the Hursts from Pride and Prejudice means that while the plot itself remains largely unaltered, there is a notable lack of romantic context within which to tell Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy’s love story. Of course, we see the marriage-by-necessity of her best friend Charlotte to Mr. Collins, but besides that, there is no truly unhappy relationship in the movie. This means that the adaptation fails to capture the same essence of romantic realism that Austen was able to write about so beautifully in her book.

7 Thom Merrilin – The Wheel Of Time Season 2

The Character Only Appeared In The Wheel Of Time Season 1

Thomdril “Thom” Merrilin was a pretty important character in Robert Jordan’s The Wheel of Time book series. He also appeared in season 1 of Prime Video’s TV adaptation, portrayed by Alexandre Willaume. Thom is a gleeman who, in the books, is depicted as mostly kind and considerate, if a little short-tempered. Willaume’s portrayal differs slightly from the books, with Thom being a more dark, brooding, morally gray character.

Thom did not return for The Wheel Of Time season 2 due to Willaume’s scheduling conflicts, making his future in the show uncertain. The important role that Thom plays later on in the book series makes his prominent omission in season 2 confusing at best and worrying at worst. While Willaume has said that Thom “should be in for season 3,” a lack of clarity around the fate of a fan-favorite character could lead to a further deviation from the source material and cause problems for future seasons of Prime Video’s adaptation (The Mighty Dragon Podcast via WoTSeries).

6 Glorfindel – The Lord Of The Rings

Glorfindel Was Replaced By Arwen

One of the most iconic scenes in Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings movie adaptations comes in the Fellowship of the Ring, where Arwen (Liv Tyler) rescues Frodo (Elijah Wood) from the Nazgûl and uses a spell to send a river crashing over them. J. R. R. Tolkien’s original book featured a slightly different circumstance involving Glorfindel, one of the most powerful Elves in Middle-earth performing the spell himself. After this, Glorfindel then safely escorts Frodo and the rest of the fellowship to Rivendell.

While Arwen does feature in the books and is a very important character in the movie adaptations, excluding Glorfindel from The Lord of the Rings has deprived audiences of one of the coolest characters Tolkien ever wrote. Omitting Glorfindel, with his extensive wisdom and experience of Middle-earth, was not a worthy sacrifice for changing the introduction of Arwen. There is whiplash from meeting Arwen as Frodo’s savior to discovering that she had been a love interest of Aragorn’s. The inclusion of Glorfindel would have made this section of Fellowship‘s adaptation feel less jumpy and full of exposition.

5 Adam Warlock – Avengers: Infinity War and Avengers: Endgame

A Wasted Opportunity By The Marvel Cinematic Universe

The third and fourth Avengers movies are bursting with expert storytelling and characterization that helps bring the culmination of eleven years of build-up to life. However, there is one glaring character from The Infinity Gauntlet comic who was missing in both adaptations – Adam Warlock. This was especially surprising, not only because of Adam’s crucial role in essentially leading the fight against Thanos in the comic, but because he had already been teased as the next big addition to the MCU in the post-credit scene of Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2.

Despite eventually appearing in Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3, Adam’s omission from the end of the Infinity Saga was a wasted opportunity to add some real cosmic kick to the franchise earlier on. Of course, Adam is “born” after the death of Thanos in the MCU, but there is certainly a feeling that audiences missed out on witnessing a character who, due to his strong connection to the Soul Stone in the comics, truly understood Thanos’ motivations.

4 Madge Undersee – The Hunger Games

Madge’s Omission Undercuts A Key Katniss Moment

In the 2012 movie adaptation of The Hunger Games, protagonist Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) is depicted in District 12 as being a rather lonely character, only really interacting with Gale (Liam Hemsworth) and her family. Suzanne Collins’ book tells a slightly different story, introducing Katniss’ friend, Madge Undersee, who does not appear in the movies. In the books, Madge gives Katniss the Mockingjay pin that would become the symbol of rebellion in the later story, whereas Katniss gets the pin from a District 12 market in the movie adaptation.

While it was a nice touch in The Hunger Games to provide the pin with its roots in District 12, Madge’s omission from the adaptation makes Katniss’ acquisition of the Mockingjay symbol a rather impersonal gesture. Besides her family and Gale, Madge is one of the few people in the books that Katniss has waiting for her in District 12, making the pin a metaphorical way of the two friends staying attached to one another. Without Madge, the movies make it difficult to gain a sense of the true attachment that Katniss has to her home District until it is destroyed.

3 Dr. Martin Gutierrez – Jurassic Park Franchise

The Good Doctor

Dr. Martin Gutierrez is a minor, but no less important character in Michael Crichton’s Jurassic Park novel, working as a biological scientist in Costa Rica at the time of the Isla Nublar incident. He specializes in researching lizards and discovers evidence of dinosaurs on the mainland. However, in Steven Spielberg’s now-iconic 1993 movie adaptation, the doctor is nowhere to be seen. In fact, his storyline is cut altogether.

Gutierrez’s exclusion from the adaptation means that the chief scientific voice on offer is Dr Henry Wu (BD Wong). In the book, Gutierrez realizes that the dinosaurs are an invasive species, but, as nobody fulfills this role in the movie, it makes the build-up to and stakes of the future Jurassic Park movies weaker. In particular, because of its focus on dinosaurs living alongside humans, Jurassic World: Dominion could have been a much better movie had it focused its premise around Gutierrez’s scientific expertise that is set out so clearly in the original book.

2 Charlie Weasley – Harry Potter Franchise

A Missed Opportunity To Up The Films’ Cool Factor

The list of excluded Harry Potter characters from the books to the movies could fill several books itself. However, arguably the most prominent character that never appears in the movie adaptations is Charlie Weasley, one of Ron’s (Rupert Grint) many older brothers. Although Charlie is mentioned several times, especially regarding his expert knowledge of dragons, the only time the movies physically show him is in the background of a Weasley family photo in the Daily Prophet.

If the adaptation had stuck with the original story from the books, Charlie would have played a very important role in both Sorcerer’s Stone and the Goblet of Fire. Not only do the movies brush aside Hagrid having to get rid of his dragon, Norbert (in the books, Charlie sends some friends to take the dragon away), but they don’t involve Charlie in the First Task of the Tri-Wizard Tournament either. Excluding Charlie entirely from the Harry Potter films appears to be an unnecessary change that robbed audiences of one of the coolest characters of the series.

1 Lady Stoneheart – Game of Thrones

A Major Twist Left Out

Game of Thrones tells the story of Catelyn Stark (Michelle Fairley) along very similar lines to George R.R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire book series. She mourns Ned’s (Sean Bean) death, helps Robb (Richard Madden) wage his war, and dies of a slit throat at the Red Wedding in season 3. However, in a twist at the end of A Storm of Swords,Catelyn is revealed to have been resurrected into the cruel and vengeful Lady Stoneheart. No such character appears in the HBO adaptation.

Stoneheart’s inclusion in Game of Thrones would have been an incredible twist to see unfold. As well as this, Stoneheart could have added another layer of nuanced morality to the adaptation. A crucial cornerstone of the books (and the show to a much lesser extent) is that there are no traditional notions of “good” or “bad” in Westeros, and Stoneheart, who is so brutal in her vengeance, would have been the perfect plot device to strengthen this message on the small screen.

Sources: Rick Riordan, The Mighty Dragon Podcast via WoTSeries