Movie better than the Book

[Max the Mostly Mediocre]

The X-Men, Spider-Man, Iron Man, and even Fantastic Four films are [i]vastly[/i] superior to the original comics. Christ, I hate that era of comic writing.

Oh, yes, and the film 300 was much more entertaining than the comic. It was stupid in both formats, but it was actually fun on screen. On the page, it was simply dull.

[Calibandar]

Quote Arthmail

[quote]Antonio Banderas was good in the movie, but the Scandinavian guys they used to play the vikings made it for me. Especially the guy that plays Beowulf. Best on screen Beowulf that i have seen, including the one with Gerard Butler and the one with Ray Winstone.[/quote]

Agreed on this. The book is not bad btw. But I really like this movie. The Vikings just come across really cool, especially the Beowulf actor. And Banderas is certainly tolerable here. I think it's the best of the 3 Beowulf movies.

[Alarich]

[quote name='Jaime L.' post='1341269' date='May 4 2008, 05.28']The film is pretty good and far more subversive than it first appears. I admit I've never read the story, but the film stands on its own merit. It's critiquing what it's presumed to support (ie: the amusing propaganda snippets throughout, uniforms designed to look like SS officers, the embracing of violence without a hint of reflection of empathy, the idiotic, unexamined meat-grinding tactics used in the war). It's play like a B action movie, but if you took it at face value you didn't see it right.[/quote]

TBH, I think the book does that much better than film. Also the film cuts out most of the self-reflection of the narrator while concetrating on the action. Finally, the portrait of the MI as some kind as mindless cannon-fodder does Heinlein a great injustice IMO. When Heinlein "invented" the MI he foretold a lot of interesting tactical and technical changes in the infantry that have since then taken place or are in the process of being implemented. The film reverts the MI to some kind of WWI infantry model.
In many ways the film struggles with the fact that the book is written in a way that's really hard to bring on screen. Perhaps they should have called it "Attack of the Space Bugs" or something like that and then I would probably enjoy the film more on it's own merits. As it is, calling it "Starship Troopers" begs for comparison with the book and in that respect, the film can't compare IMO.

[Teng Ai Hui]

[quote name='Un-Yearded Pita' post='1340926' date='May 3 2008, 15.02']Memoirs of a Geisha: The movie was the book writ movie. Nothing was changed, and the medium of film is by default better than the medium of literature (Sorry...)[/quote]

Agreed. I just finished reading MoaG, and as UYPita says, the book and the movie are very similar. So much so that the book feels like a novelization of the movie rather than an inspiration for the movie.

[Jaxom 1974]

[quote name='Max the Mostly Mediocre' post='1341340' date='May 4 2008, 00.55']The X-Men, Spider-Man, Iron Man, and even Fantastic Four films are [i]vastly[/i] superior to the original comics. Christ, I hate that era of comic writing.[/quote]

What era would that be? The era that the comics were created? You hate history? You prefer the era of Image in the 90s where art took center stage over the writing don't you? :rolleyes:

[Ser Barry]

Atonement. I was unconvinced by the basic premise in the book regarding Briony's actions. The movie was more convincing but I still found it a bit dull.

[Xray the Enforcer]

Thoroughly disagree that the movie versions of [i]Princess Bride[/i], Jane Austen and [i]Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas[/i] were superior to the books. Especially that last one. Talk about missing the fucking point.

[Slurktan]

[quote name='saint777' post='1340690' date='May 3 2008, 08.34']Peter Jackson's [b]Lord of the Rings[/b] is better than the book. Bakshi's [b]Lord of the Rings[/b] is infinitely inferior to the book even though Bakshi's adaptation is more faithful to the text.[/quote]


Ermm what? Bakshi's adaptation is more faithful in that Elves don't make a new Last Alliance with Rohan because that very idea is retarded. Almost everything else? Jackson's is more faithful, although he does steal a number of shots directly from the Bakshi film.

[Astra]

[quote name='Alarich' post='1341080' date='May 3 2008, 23.36']Really can't let this one pass. I still can't believe how they butchered one of the absolute classics of sf literature in that film.[/quote]

Well, the movie was a brilliant action movie with just a few bit of romance in it. One of the best Sci-Fi movies out there. However the book...a leaflet to convice youth that they absolutely must serve in the Army or they cannot call themselves men.

[niamh]

[quote name='Xray the Enforcer' post='1341560' date='May 4 2008, 15.14']Talk about missing the fucking point.[/quote]
That's my big one gripe with PJ and why I want to murder him slice by slice with a blunt and rusty axe every full moon in a dark corner.
Since everybody who prefers those movies missed the fucking point too by a nautical mile, they seem to think my planned course of action is slightly excessive :dunno: Go figure

Now, instead of writing reams of useless rants about it, I wish I had had the journalistic sharp mind to say from the start: "talk about missing the fucking point."

[Alarich]

[quote name='Astra' post='1341586' date='May 4 2008, 17.11']Well, the movie was a brilliant action movie with just a few bit of romance in it. One of the best Sci-Fi movies out there. However the book...a leaflet to convice youth that they absolutely must serve in the Army or they cannot call themselves men.[/quote]

Uhm, yeah. Whatever. Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion, I suppose.

[Ashamanic]

Agree with many, Lord of the Rings
Without the boring songs, poems, Bombadil, the endless pages of descriptions of the scenery and much of the atrocious dialogue, the movies were far superior

[Xray the Enforcer]

[quote name='niamhson Red'Toole' post='1341656' date='May 4 2008, 11.30']I wish I had had the journalistic sharp mind to say from the start: "talk about missing the fucking point."[/quote]

I'm just too lazy to write a rant today. :)
I hear you on LotR -- I admit, I enjoyed the films for what they were, but I'd still vote books over movie by a long mile. The movies were just bare plot, and they neglected [i]all[/i] of what made Tolkien "Tolkien." Miss the fucking point, indeed.

[Aemon Stark]

[quote name='strongboar' post='1341047' date='May 3 2008, 19.04']3) Denethor. Books: the Palantirs/dead of his sons leads to his finall fall. However, he's presented as at least competent and responsible ruler. MOVIES: he's defeatist from the start, takes completly insane decisions for no apparent reasons, and ends up BEING MASSACRED BY GANDALF WHILE HIS BODYGUARDS JUST STANDING THERE.[/quote]

And then, after some unprompted self-immolation, Denethor proceeds to run from the tombs, up to the White Tower, and then all the way along the courtyard to the very edge of precipice, proceeding to jump off. It's surely one of the most ridiculous things in the whole movie trilogy.

Jackson has no sense of subtlety or restraint (see King Kong for the clearest examples of this), and it's only a testament to his other talents that the LOTR movies weren't a complete mess. His treatment of Wormtongue is particularly bad - the theme of appearances not being relevant to true natures runs through all of Tolkien's works, though at least some of this makes it into FOTR concerning Aragorn's "ranger" appearance. (Of course, that's why FOTR is the best, especially the extended cut.)

Concerning Crichton, I've never read Congo, but I have a hard time believing that the book could actually be worse than the movie. I love Jurassic Park, not least because I was 10 when it came out. I recall The Andromeda Strain being fairly similar, movie vs. book.

I don't really agree that Children of Men was better than P.D. James' book - they're different enough that a comparison needn't really be made, though I can see a lot of the book's plot points not working on film.

[Alytha]

Coppola's version of Dracula is much better than the book, which I found boring as hell.

The Sword of Truth. Nobody's seen it yet, but it can only be better. ;)

[Astra]

[quote name='Xray the Enforcer' post='1341693' date='May 4 2008, 18.13']The movies were just bare plot, and they neglected [i]all[/i] of what made Tolkien "Tolkien." Miss the fucking point, indeed.[/quote]

I could never say it so well myself. It is [u]exactly[/u] what I felt about the movie.

[Crazydog7]

Children of Men book awful
movie not so much.

[Maid of Tarth]

Making a future prediction.....I started reading the "Southern Vampire" series because Alan Ball is making a series of it for HBO.....dreadful, dreadful books. Absolute drivel and the treatment of the female protagonist is extremely worrying. That being said, the basic ideas are solid and in the hands of a decent author could have been great books. But in the hands of Alan Ball for tv, I'm predicting that this series will be superb and the books will be forgotten. But I'll probably finish reading the books first anyway. :lol:


Starship Troopers is one of the [u]worst[/u] movies I have ever seen. And I'll never read the book because it'll only call back how absolutely awful and what a complete waste of time that film was. :stunned:

[Max the Mostly Mediocre]

[quote name='Jaxom 1974' post='1341538' date='May 4 2008, 05.40']What era would that be? The era that the comics were created? You hate history? You prefer the era of Image in the 90s where art took center stage over the writing don't you? :rolleyes:[/quote]

Yes, the era that those comics were created. It's not that I hate history, it's that I hate inept, heavy-handed writing. The comics of that era had all the subtlety of a sledgehammer to the face, and were equally desirable.

And no, I don't like the Image era.

[Astra]

[quote name='Maid of Tarth' post='1342351' date='May 5 2008, 08.33']Starship Troopers is one of the [u]worst[/u] movies I have ever seen. And I'll never read the book because it'll only call back how absolutely awful and what a complete waste of time that film was. :stunned:[/quote]

Frankly speaking there is not much of the book in the movie besides a fact there is a war with bugs. You might like the book...