Gold Storm Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Most book people get a bad elitist reputation of always saying that the book was so much better than the movie. For the most part I agree with that; however, there has been several times that I did not like the book, but liked the movie. Here are some examples of books that I did not like or get but likes the movie a lot: [u]The Princes Bride[/u]: this is one of my favorite movies ever, but I just did not get or like the book at all. [u]The Lion, Which, and the Wardrobe[/u]: Did not like the book at all. I think that I was too old when I read it and it was geared more for kids, but the characters were flat, and the villains were pathetic. I did not want to watch the movie because of the book, but my niece what visiting us and she wanted to watch it, and much to my surprise I liked the movie. It felt more updated and the villains were scarier and more fearsome in the movie. [u]The Lord of the Rings[/u]: I know this will be sacrilege to some, tried several times to read the series, but I did not like the writing style a lot of singing and the battle scenes were not that good, but the movies were great Jackson made the books come a live for me. What are some books you did not like, but made a great movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harlot Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Totally agree on the [i]Princess Bride[/i]. I found the book, especially all the author asides, to be very tedious. I tried reading it after seeing the movie several times so I'm sure that clouded my reading. I had the same experience with Jean Shephard's [i]In God We Trust, All Others Pay Cash[/i], the collection of short stories that A Christmas Story is based upon. The movie is such a classic that I just couldn't read the book fairly. I think The Dead Zone movie with Christopher Walken is much, much better than the book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Kilmore Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Harry Potter. I tried reading it a couples of times, it all felt flat and whatever to me. I saw the movie and for me, it fleshed things out more and I was able to approach the series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Manticore Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Which? Which? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 [quote name='Gold Storm' post='1339037' date='May 2 2008, 10.07'][u]The Lord of the Rings[/u][/quote] Agreed on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duchess of malfi Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 [i]Jaws[/i] - movie is a classic of sorts for pacing and suspense, book is padded with worthless subplots and drags like hell. Film is a million times better than the book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wedge Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 While Rex Pickett's book was a good read and had a little different ending and some hilarious scenes not in the movie, [b]Sideways [/b]was an excellent movie. I've rewatched this warped pathetic buddy comedy about a dozen times and it retains it's excellence every viewing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcf Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 For me the gold-standard for movies that outshine their book origins is The Shawshank Redemption. The SK short story it's based on is good, but nowhere near as powerful as the movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of Oop North Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 [quote]The Princes Bride: this is one of my favorite movies ever, but I just did not get or like the book at all.[/quote] [quote]I had the same experience with Jean Shephard's In God We Trust, All Others Pay Cash, the collection of short stories that A Christmas Story is based upon. The movie is such a classic that I just couldn't read the book fairly.[/quote] Holy Smokes, you're right! I totally agree with both of these. The film versions were far superior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Kilmore Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 [quote name='kcf' post='1339083' date='May 2 2008, 08.35']For me the gold-standard for movies that outshine their book origins is The Shawshank Redemption. The SK short story it's based on is good, but nowhere near as powerful as the movie.[/quote] I would second this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guinevere Seaworth Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Seconded the Lord of the Rings. The books were good, but the movie brought the Middle-earth to life. I read Stardust, but I thought the movie was superb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astra Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 The Starship Troopers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quoth Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Agree with Princess Bride, Harry Potter and Shawshank Redemption. Add to the list The Godfather. Movie = Gold. Book = Atrocious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bellis Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Children of Men. Most Jane Austen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gold Storm Posted May 2, 2008 Author Share Posted May 2, 2008 [quote name='Quoth' post='1339121' date='May 2 2008, 07.03']Add to the list The Godfather. Movie = Gold. Book = Atrocious.[/quote] Yes, could not stand the book way too many side stories and pointless chapters. Movie was tons better than the book, and how they were able to make the [u]Godfather II[/u] out a few flashbacks amazes me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isis Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 [quote name='Guinevere Seaworth' post='1339116' date='May 2 2008, 16.01']Seconded the Lord of the Rings. The books were good, but the movie brought the Middle-earth to life. I read Stardust, but I thought the movie was superb.[/quote]The [i]films[/i] were good. The books were incomparably better. Yep, the films DID bring Middle-earth to life... but that doesn't mean they're better than the books though. Loads of fantastic material that was perfectly filmable did not make it onto the screen and yet we got flaming Denethor, Gimli as a perpetual joke, superhero Legolas, self-indulgent PJ and pals cameos and lots of other bizarre choices. No point even going there... Agree on Stardust - thought the book was massively overrated and derivative of finer works. I think The English Patient made an amazing film, but the book did very little for me. That's what I consider to be a successful adaptation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCracken Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 The LOTR films adaption can't touch the books! fear and loathing in las vagus anyone?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 The LOTR films were smart enough to leave alot of the boring on the cutting room floor. Although more and more kept creeping in as the trilogy went on. The first one is the best. It retells Fellowship of the Ring while cutting out all the boring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCracken Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Have to agree the first one is the best! The films turn the story into a hack n slash thriller. You don't get the sense of adventure, travel, awe, fear and foreboding the books give you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 [quote name='King in the North.' post='1339180' date='May 2 2008, 10.28']Have to agree the first one is the best! The films turn the story into a hack n slash thriller. You don't get the sense of adventure, travel, awe, fear and foreboding the books give you.[/quote] The first one does this excellently actually (imo). Which is why it's the best one. The rest start to drag a little is the main problem, and they've got some dumb decisions in plotting (Denethor, etc.). Regardless, they at least drop the slow, plodding, boring tone of the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.