Guest EricMM Report post Posted August 13, 2002 Maybe I don't have the most literate friends, but am I the only person who will sit watching a movie (at home in front of the TV I'm not THAT rude to do this in the theatre) and say "The book was much better" "They took something good out of the movie, it was better in the book" and such? Perhaps I am just disgruntled by the literacy rate among people, but yes while Shawshank redemption was good, the book was better. Same with the Apt Pupil and Stand By Me and we are talking about ONE BOOK. Some guy told me that the movie for It was good, and I asked him if he had ever read the book, and he said no, it wouldn't be good. I almost yelled at him. Hearts in Atlantis was also the worst conversion ever, considering it gutted/decapitated the book. Hmm notice a trend? Well it would be the same with other authors as well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Youth N Asia Report post Posted August 13, 2002 "The Stand" by Stephen King The movie came of as lame, almost goofy...but the book was an epic story Then there was "Watchers" by Dean Koontz...movie blew ass but the book was great. Althought I liked "How to Killing a Mockingbird" better as a movie Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest J*ingus Report post Posted August 14, 2002 I think that Jaws and The Godfather are the only books in history that came out better as movies. For pretty much everything else, the book pissed upon the film from a great height. EDIT: thought of another one, The Sweet Hereafter. But the general principle still stands. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest pochorenella Report post Posted August 14, 2002 The Lost World was a far better book than movie. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest godthedog Report post Posted August 15, 2002 'raging bull' was better than the book (although the book is better than you'd think it would be). other than that, yeah...it's almost impossible to make a movie that lives up to the book. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest DragonflyKid Report post Posted August 15, 2002 I'm always caught between thinking I should read the book first then watch the movie and see the story come to life or watch the movie then read the book and see the story become more elaborate while being able to picture the characters and settings. When I watched the original Shining movie I thought it was great, I then read the book about 2 months ago and I liked the book better. I was able to picture Nicholson as Jack(Because he was so great.) and the story was much more complete in the book. I also liked the MFTV mini series as it was truer to the book than the Kubric film. "The Stand" by Stephen King The movie came of as lame, almost goofy...but the book was an epic story Where is the Stand available, I have heard the movie was good but I can't find it. Do any particular channels air it occasionally or has it been releashed on VHS or DVD? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Youth N Asia Report post Posted August 15, 2002 The Stand is around on VHS...if you can't find it at the stores you might want to check Ebay or flea markets or something. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest BorneAgain Report post Posted August 15, 2002 Lord of the Flies: Book=Great Movie= crap crap crap crap crap crap crap To Kill a Mockingbird was dissapointing too Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest La Parka Es Mi Papa Report post Posted August 16, 2002 I've actually seen two LOTF movies. One old black and white one, and one color one. But they both blew. Although I didn't think the book was particularly great either. The Stand is my favorite book, but the movie is god awful. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest the 1inch punch Report post Posted August 17, 2002 American Psycho is great as a book, the movie is really watered down i fear for Rules of Attraction, i really do Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest J*ingus Report post Posted August 17, 2002 Just came to mind, two AWESOME books that were transformed into half-assed movies: -From Hell. I am about as big a fan as you'll find of Alan Moore's writing style, and this work was second only to Watchmen in my opinion. It was deep, wide, emotional, shocking, and it had a heart, and a point, while somehow staying very faithful to the real historical events. The movie just ditched all of that, completely invented a new main character, jettisoned entire subplots, merrily rewrote history, and then spent what felt like hours at a time blathering on and on about Jews and grapes. -Vampire$. What a f'n great book, about a bunch of guys who get paid by the Vatican to hunt insanely dangerous vampires with some really cool gear. And when Carpenter made the movie, he basically chopped off the entire last half of the book, and inserted endless sequences of Woods and Baldwin abusing Sheryl Lee over and over again. Thanks, John. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest fk teale Report post Posted August 18, 2002 The only time I preferred the movie to the book was with Forster's Passage to India. But then again, I have a huge unreasoning hard-on for the girl who played Adela, so. Has Dean Koontz ever had a movie made of his books that wasn't an embarrassment? I saw Hideaway the other night and felt like driving right down to CA to give him a big consoling hug. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest J*ingus Report post Posted August 18, 2002 Hey, just thought I'd redirect your attention to this thread for your viewing enjoyment. Also, apparently they are NOT airing my pants-splitting referee debut, as apparently the heathen scum of a microphone crapped out on us during that match and it has no sound. Grrrrr. On a somewhat related note, I actually took my first bump in front of a live crowd last night (YAY) but it kinda sucked and won't be aired for two weeks or so (BOO). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Youth N Asia Report post Posted August 18, 2002 Has Dean Koontz ever had a movie made of his books that wasn't an embarrassment? I saw Hideaway the other night and felt like driving right down to CA to give him a big consoling hug. Let's see: Hideaway Watchers Servents of the Twilight Phantoms... It's not looking good. AH...Intensity...made for tv movie for Fox...I thought it was very good. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JaKyL25 Report post Posted August 18, 2002 The Lost World was a far better book than movie. I haven't actually read The Lost World, but Crichton'd have to actively be trying to suck to make the book worse than that god-awful movie. Jurassic Park, on the other hand, I HAVE read, and yes it is better than the movie. The movie's not bad, though. For some variety, here's a couple more recent popular books-to-flicks that didn't hold up very well. Harry Potter & The Sorceror's Stone: Decent book, by FAR the worst of the four thus far though. The movie, while decent and admirably long, was slightly worse than the book. My main gripe is a relatively minor point, and that being WTF was up with the Bloody Baron in his cameo in the movie? That is NOT the brooding spectre that I know from the books. I wonder how they're gonna work the later, longer books into movie form though. I imagine much cutting. The Fellowship of the Ring: Decent movie, but BOY did they hack this thing to death. The section between the Party and Rivendell actually caused me physical PAIN to see so much stuff cut/altered. I understand the need for time restraints and stuff, but still. Nice try, Peter Jackson, but as I just said in another thread about this, if it's impossible to do it right, DON'T DO IT AT ALL. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Report post Posted August 19, 2002 LOTR was a truly great film. For the first time ever we were (and are) seeing great actors, wonderful special effects, and an almost perfect distilling of the basic plot come together. Keep in mind also, that FOTR is easily the most heavy on exposition of the three and lacks the action of ROTK or even TTT. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JaKyL25 Report post Posted August 19, 2002 LOTR was a truly great film. For the first time ever we were (and are) seeing great actors, wonderful special effects, and an almost perfect distilling of the basic plot come together. Yeah, yeah, I know, I'm just a crazy purist, dammit! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest fk teale Report post Posted August 19, 2002 Hey, just thought I'd redirect your attention to this thread for your viewing enjoyment. The WRATH OF JINGUS~! is one of our nation's most misapplied resources. MORE CREDIBLE TARGETS PLZ. Also, you split your pants in the ring? [i WISH TO KNOW MORE] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Incandenza Report post Posted August 19, 2002 TC Boyle's The Road to Wellville was a deliciously dark satire on early 20th century health fads, but the film version aimed for slapstack comedy and failed. Miserably. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ozymandias Report post Posted August 20, 2002 I haven't read all of the original books, but the following movie adaptions are all excellent. The Godfather A Clockwork Orange Fight Club Jaws The Silence of the Lambs Full Metal Jacket Trainspotting The Shining Goodfellas The Last Temptation of Christ Casino Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest SuperTonyJaymz Report post Posted August 20, 2002 Along Came A Spider was the worst. I mean, the book was great. Soneji came of as a badass, smart and evil. But the movie made him look like a crazy pussy. Then they had him killed. I was so pissed i satrted cussing in the movie theater. I mean, Soneji was the best villian ever in any of Patterson's books, and they kill him, like that? Pissed me of so much. same goes with the JP:Lost World movie. Book was way better Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Youth N Asia Report post Posted August 20, 2002 Along Came a Spider I've never seen the movie...but with the Cross books Alex Cross is probably in his mid 30s...has two young children...and lives at home with his grandmother. And for the movie...Morgan Freeman...???? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest bob_barron Report post Posted August 20, 2002 The movie version of Matilda didn't stay faithful to the book at all Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kahran Ramsus Report post Posted August 21, 2002 Any of Shakespeare's plays (with the exception of Branaugh's Hamlet) are better than the movie versions. Some are good, some aren't, but none are as good as the original thing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JaKyL25 Report post Posted August 21, 2002 Damn, Kahran has a point. Some of those might be the all-time "winners" as far as the quality gap goes between the written work and the movie. Ouch. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest bps "The Truth" 21 Report post Posted August 21, 2002 First of all...Godfather the movie and the book are about tied in my view...and I hated Jaws. More importantly: I will now unveil the movie adaptation that was so much better than the book it was scary: Psycho. The book is nothing compared to the movie due to choices that the movie made that changed from the book. SPOILERS...i guess... 1. The book introduces Norman Bates in the first chapter...but it works far better by introducing him later in the story. 2. In the book, Bates is a terribly unattractive and unlikeable character. Which simply doesn't work for the story in any way. The likeable Anthony Perkins MAKES that story work. When Marion dies the viewer has lost the main character...and they are drawn to Bates, who they feel sorry for due to his situation (which just doesn't work with an unlikeable character). In the film he is presented as seemingly equal to MArion...and so you want him to suceed the way you wanted Marion too. Ironically...the viewer roots for Marion despite her stealing the money, out of pity...and they are thrust onto Bates...who they feel sorry for as well. In rooting for him the story's conclusion works on a few levels. The book missed all of that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest DARRYLXWF Report post Posted August 24, 2002 2001: A space odyssey, when it was originally based on a short story Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
