I read Jodi Picoult's book about 3 years ago, a present from Other C for my birthday that year. While I like reading about controversial subject matter, I find Ms Picoult's books rather tame fodder in how sometimes there isn't a good enough conclusion, she tackles a subject but stops short of going for the kill.
Last night, MNET showed the movie version of the book as it's Sunday night movie.
As Hollywood likes to tear apart a book, the story in the movie differs quite substantially from the book itself which I found rather distracting. The story tackles the controversial subject of designer babies as spare parts for a sick child.
In this case, the child in question has a cancer of the blood. Her younger sister (in the book she is 13 and in the movie she is 11) is designed and born to be a walking body parts replacement for her. Until they want her to donate a kidney. Then she sues her parents to become medically emancipated from them. In the book at the end, she wins her case but dies in a car accident and her lawyer, who has power of attorney, authorises the removal of her organs for her dying sister.
In the movie, her sister is the driving force behind the court case because she wants to die, she is ready to die. The film ends with her dying, the younger sister winning her case and not having to donate a kidney and going on to live out her life.
Another large departure from the book is that the brother, who is a juvenile delinquent who likes to burn things (his father, a fireman, taught him a thing or two), becomes a dyslexic artist.
While the movie showed the emotion behind the designer babies bred as spare parts angle much better than the book did, I have to say it was overly disappointing as the ending totally negates any good or bad points made around the debate.