Adaptation purists are really annoying.

Just for clarity, I mean guys that think that the only way to adapt anything is to make it as close to the source material as possible and any deviation from it is a point against the adaptation, unless it was absolutely necessary. Thus why, adaptation purists.

I want to see the adapting director/novelist to give their own take of the events. I want for them to get creative, while still exhibiting love and the original vision of the source material. When I see the adaptation that is different from its source, it makes me wonder what the source is like. When I see an adaptation that is basically a dry retelling of the source material, that's just a reason for me to not read the source material. Why would I want to read something what I already saw?

When I saw Game of Thrones and found out that its source material ASOIAF was way more heavy on magic, I got excited to read them. Like, what do you mean Catelyn Stark gets revived? What do you mean Frodo Baggins is a fifty year old dude and is very different from his counterpart in the movies? Learning a little bit about the differences gets me invested in the source material. It makes me wonder just how far they deviated. But when everything is translated with very little differences it makes me stick to one, and it will be the one that I read/saw first.

Even just the recent The Last of Us adaptation. I didn't see it because I heard it's a near one to one copy of the game's story. Why would I want to see it if I played the game?