Which movies are better than their book counterparts?
I can only think of...
Alfred Hitchcock's Rebecca (1940) based off the Daphne Du Maurier novel
The Wizard of Oz (1939) based off the L. Frank Baum novel
Josh-da-man
03-27-04, 10:20 PM
Starship Troopers
darkside
03-28-04, 12:21 AM
Pretty much any Tom Clancy book turned into a movie for me. The books bore me to tears. They drag on forever and seem to have no editing at all. When cut down to a two hour movie though they are pretty entertaining.
Kevin M. Dean
03-28-04, 02:40 AM
Forrest Gump
benedict
03-28-04, 06:03 AM
Almost any biblical epic ;)
j123vt_99
03-29-04, 03:08 PM
Jurrasic Park is real close.. As good as the book was, seeing those dinosaurs on the big screen was pretty cool
nny
03-29-04, 06:55 PM
Fight Club's my favorite movie of all time. The book is great too, but everybody did such a great job on the movie that it easily surpassed the book.
Not quite an adaptation of the book, but I thought Apocalypse Now was much better than Heart of Darkness.
Ghost World was better than the comic, but that was partially because I think they took some ideas from some of Clowes short stories and added them to the movie.
I've never read Requiem for a Dream, but considering the only thing about the movie that wasn't amazing was the script, I'd imagine the movie's much better than the book.
BizRodian
03-29-04, 09:05 PM
Hannibal.
I know a lot of people don't like either, but I thought it was an excellent movie, while the book is rather... odd...
Nighthawk
03-30-04, 11:07 AM
Originally posted by Josh-da-man
Starship Troopers
How could you say that? They murdered the book. The director of that movie totally misinterpretted the book if you listen to the comentary.
j123vt_99
03-30-04, 11:45 AM
to be fair, you didn;'t ask about a movie that followed the book the closest
Originally posted by Nighthawk
How could you say that? They murdered the book. The director of that movie totally misinterpretted the book if you listen to the comentary.
Kal-El
03-30-04, 12:02 PM
LOTR.
Groucho
03-30-04, 12:12 PM
There are a lot of examples, but I always like to choose American Psycho.
MrN
03-30-04, 12:39 PM
The Shining
Geofferson
03-30-04, 05:51 PM
Most recently, I thought Runaway Jury was better than the book.
NaturalMystic79
03-30-04, 07:03 PM
How is the Silence of the Lambs book? I'm a person just getting into reading(for pleasure) and want to pick up dark, psychological books. Since I love movies of that sort, I figure this is a good place to start.
kcbrett5
03-31-04, 12:02 PM
Shawshank Redemption.
The book is only like 90 pages long.
keyed
03-31-04, 01:24 PM
Originally posted by kcbrett5
Shawshank Redemption.
The book is only like 90 pages long. Shawshank Redemption was never a book per se. It was released as of 4 short stories in Different Seasons. As for it being only 90 pages, I'm not so sure that it's a strike against it. The problem with most novel-based movies is that it's impossible to condense 200+ pages into 2 hours of film. I've never read the story, but at 90 pages, it's possible that they were able to include everything from the story into the movie.
As for movies that are better that their books, I've heard that Jaws falls into that category. Spielberg was able to cut out the unnecessary affair and added a better ending.
Eric F
03-31-04, 07:24 PM
Alot of the Philip K. Dick movies are much longer and intricate than their short story counterparts.
Minority Report is an excellent example of this.
NenHatling
04-01-04, 04:24 AM
LOTR.
You're kidding, right?
Tommy_Harn
04-01-04, 09:25 AM
Originally posted by Kevin M. Dean
Forrest Gump
Wow, I really, really disagree with this.
While the book seemed to unfold nicely, the movie (especially towards the end) just through out situations quickly and gratuitiously (sp). Plus, I found the movie to be painfully cheesy.
Kevin M. Dean
04-01-04, 09:56 AM
Originally posted by Tommy_Harn
Plus, I found the movie to be painfully cheesy.
What and Gump going into space isn't?
ceeece
04-01-04, 11:24 AM
Star Wars!! I actually read Lucas' novel for Episode IV. I have them all and really need to read them.
Groucho
04-01-04, 11:25 AM
While not explicitly stated, I don't think the original poster meant to include novelizations.
Easy
04-01-04, 12:27 PM
The Godfather
I read it again recently and I really prefer the movies ... both 1&2.
ceeece
04-01-04, 12:33 PM
Originally posted by Groucho
While not explicitly stated, I don't think the original poster meant to include novelizations.
I could be wrong, but I don't think Star Wars was a novelization. Wasn't it entitled "The Adventures of Luke Skywalker" (edit: or Starkiller) in the earliest stages? I think Lucas wrote the book before the screen play. I noticed subtle differences in it, like the colors of the X-Wing Squadrons. Again, I could be wrong.
Groucho
04-01-04, 12:39 PM
Originally posted by ceeece
I could be wrong, but I don't think Star Wars was a novelization. Wasn't it entitled "The Adventures of Luke Skywalker" (edit: or Starkiller) in the earliest stages? I think Lucas wrote the book before the screen play. I noticed subtle differences in it, like the colors of the X-Wing Squadrons. Again, I could be wrong. No, I've read the first drafts of the screenplay, and they're nothing like the final product (or the book). Not only was the book a novelization, it wasn't even written by George Lucas. At the height of my Star Wars fandom, I could name the ghostwriter, but I've long since forgotten.
kcbrett5
04-01-04, 01:08 PM
Originally posted by keyed
I've never read the story, but
If you have never read it, then why are you commenting about it? I have read it and I can tell you that the movie is a whole lot better. There is way more character development in the movie than in the book.
Now please go away.
ceeece
04-01-04, 01:12 PM
Originally posted by Groucho
No, I've read the first drafts of the screenplay, and they're nothing like the final product (or the book). Not only was the book a novelization, it wasn't even written by George Lucas. At the height of my Star Wars fandom, I could name the ghostwriter, but I've long since forgotten.
Okay, thanks, Groucho. I forgot about the possibility of a ghostwriter. I do realize all the other books are novelizations I was just hazy about "Star Wars".
edit: Alan Dean Foster was the ghost writer. Just found this out.
Lastblade
04-01-04, 08:28 PM
The Bourne Identity. I tried reading the book prior to the movie, and got so bored that I barely finished it.... and have no interest in reading any of the sequels.
The movie, however, is awesome.
gp98
04-02-04, 10:53 AM
Originally posted by kcbrett5
If you have never read it, then why are you commenting about it? I have read it and I can tell you that the movie is a whole lot better. There is way more character development in the movie than in the book.
Now please go away.
That's a bit harsh. He commented about what he knew of the book (and no more). Also, you're only comment on your original post was the length of the book. By itself, that's not enough to assess a book's quality which is all he was saying. If you had mentioned character development in your first post, he probably wouldn't have responded.
TheDude
04-02-04, 04:16 PM
Originally posted by Easy
The Godfather
I read it again recently and I really prefer the movies ... both 1&2.
That's the one that I thought of when I saw this thread.
kcbrett5
04-02-04, 04:40 PM
Originally posted by gp98
That's a bit harsh.
Actually I thought I was being polite. Look, I even said please.
cineman
04-03-04, 02:37 AM
Postcards from the Edge
Beaver
04-03-04, 06:13 PM
Stand by Me, Shawshank and Princess Bride are all just as good as the books.
MediaJones
04-06-04, 07:17 PM
The Bourne Identity is a "boring" book?
Blasphemy.
movielib
04-06-04, 07:45 PM
The Graduate
Midnight Cowboy
The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie
kninestile
04-07-04, 12:12 AM
I also have to go with Forrest Gump
theneobez
04-07-04, 12:20 AM
Originally posted by MediaJones
The Bourne Identity is a "boring" book?
Blasphemy.
Ditto. Great book.
Blade
04-07-04, 03:37 AM
Originally posted by theneobez
Ditto. Great book. I think if you read it when it came out, it was a great book.
If you pick it up after having been exposed to a lot of suspense/spy movies/novels...it's an ok book that seems kind of "done before."
However, the book and movie are so different, I don't think it really qualifies for this discussion! ;)
----------
Not a movie, but the TV show Sex in the City is based on a collection of short stories. I only skimmed them but the show was far superior to what little I read. My wife actually read the book, and she concurs even more emphatically with that sentiment. :)
mytzplyx
04-07-04, 05:13 AM
Originally posted by Kal-El
LOTR.
I agree, at least for Fellowship. I didn't really get into the books until about half-way through the "second." I think its epic and classic, but there are other books better than those. It's just that it was the first and that's why some people look at them the way they do.
kramdenfan
04-08-04, 02:05 PM
I may get flamed for this, but I couldn't get through the Seabiscuit book, but thoroughly enjoyed the movie.
As for a previous post regarding Shawshank Redemption, I don't think you could follow the story originally written by Stephen King any closer! Most of King's books turned to movies, especially his earlier works, have been mangled on screen (The Shining and Christene come to mind for me). The movie versions of Sharkshank, Stand By Me, and the Green Mile were unbelievably close to the books.
Shannon Nutt
04-08-04, 03:51 PM
DIE HARD was better than the book it's based on, Roderick Thorp's "Nothing Lasts Forever".
bboisvert
04-08-04, 04:25 PM
Jaws
tasha99
04-08-04, 11:41 PM
The Last of the Mohicans was far better than the book, which I thought truly sucked.
Also, the movie of Samuel Richardson's epistolary novel Clarissa was better than the book in the sense that it wasn't around 1500 pages of letters.
Neither of these movies were especially true to the books they were adapted from.
tasha
Kal-El
04-09-04, 02:47 PM
Originally posted by NenHatling
You're kidding, right?
Nope. ROTK is the only book I actually threw across the room.
FOTR took me about a year to finish cuz I had to read 5 other books in the middle of reading it. I got thru Two Towers the quickest.
n0fear88
04-09-04, 03:12 PM
lol, FOTR took me about 5mth to read coz i had trouble getting into it at first, but TT and ROTK i managed to read in 2 weeks each :)
Mountain Biker
04-09-04, 11:09 PM
Another vote for Jaws
grunter
04-12-04, 06:30 PM
The Bridges of Madison County
Alvis
04-13-04, 07:17 AM
Clear and Present Danger. The book rambles on for a about a thousand pages through several different convoluted sub-plots. The movie was much more concise and action filled.
TCG
04-17-04, 07:33 AM
The Shining
MahatmaPetey
05-01-04, 03:20 PM
The Shining and The Exorcist are all I can think of right now.
I actually felt sick reading American Psycho. Poor rats...
iggystar
05-04-04, 11:40 AM
Another vote for Jurassic Park, but they're equally good to me.
I liked Delores Claiborne and thought the movie was just as good.
El-Kabong
05-04-04, 01:23 PM
Dude, it's TOTALY about Jaws.
The book is completly DREADFUL. The romance subplot between Hooper and Brody's wife is un-nessassary, there is no suspense between the three and the shark, and the ending makes no sense (the shark just up and dies?!? What the hell!)
How this ever got to be a best seller BEFORE the movie, I will never understand.
modfather
05-05-04, 02:19 PM
Originally posted by Kevin M. Dean
Forrest Gump
Wow, I'm surprised at this one. The book and movie are different from each other, but I laughed out loud so many times reading the book. And I laughed just as hard the 2nd and 3rd times reading it. It's still one of my very favorites (although the sequel was very dissapointing).
I love the movie, but the book is better - for different reasons...
devilshalo
05-05-04, 03:43 PM
Originally posted by grunter
The Bridges of Madison County
The extremely slow pace that Eastwood took really made me tune out of the movie. I read the book faster than the runtime of the movie. I also expected a younger couple instead of Eastwood and Streep.
devilshalo
05-05-04, 03:43 PM
Originally posted by El-Kabong
Dude, it's TOTALY about Jaws.
The book is completly DREADFUL. The romance subplot between Hooper and Brody's wife is un-nessassary, there is no suspense between the three and the shark, and the ending makes no sense (the shark just up and dies?!? What the hell!)
How this ever got to be a best seller BEFORE the movie, I will never understand.
Which is most likely why Meg will be stuck in development hell. ;)
shizawn
05-05-04, 06:39 PM
Jaws was the first I thought of.
TCG
05-08-04, 04:47 AM
the Shining
Michael Corvin
05-08-04, 05:39 PM
Damn all the Shining votes. Have you people actually read it? The book blows away the hack job Kubrick committed to celuloid. That movie is a joke.
Gotta vote for Shawshank. The novella was kinda a bore, but I do think the book form has a better ending than the film. But overall the movie was better.
Son-volt
05-10-04, 06:32 PM
Surprised at all the votes for Shawshank... though it's a great movie, it's also a great novella.
I'd vote for Field of Dreams for sure. Though the movie can be a bit manipulative, I still like it a lot. The book is very amateurish in style as far as I recall.
Ask me this question in a year and I'll say Sahara by Clive Cussler. If the movie is even marginal it'll be better than the book. Don't get me wrong, I think Cussler is a brilliant writer of plots and situations. I bet he could write a ten-page outline of a store as well as anyone. Ask for a 50 word synopsis of a Cussler book and it will always hook you. His prologue situations really pique your curiousity. But he is a terrible writer. Utterly terrible. I'd wager that no writer with less skills has sold more copies, ever. His prose if flat, his characterization is pathetic, etc. I once told someone that if a 7th grader handed me a chapter from one of his books to be graded I don't know if I could give it better than a B.
Joem
05-11-04, 08:30 PM
For me it's The Princess Bride....I love the movie, but I thought the book just didn't satisfy me like I was hoping.
shrike
05-15-04, 11:16 PM
Yet another vote for Jaws.
Apone
05-16-04, 07:32 AM
Originally posted by Michael Corvin
Damn all the Shining votes. Have you people actually read it? The book blows away the hack job Kubrick committed to celuloid. That movie is a joke.
I agree that The Shining was a horrible adaptation of the book. I don¡¯t even think Stanley Kubrick wanted to follow the book so closely with details. But it was a great movie, fun to watch Jack Nicholson go crazy and Shelley Duvall was just as scary as the twin girls.
Never mind about American Psycho. :lol:
costanza
05-16-04, 04:48 PM
went to the dollar theater last night and was pleasently suprised about secret window, adapted from stephen king's short story secret window, secret garden. i didn't go in expecting much but it turned out to be a very good flick. there were a few changes from the book where i went, hey that doesn't happen. it all worked out in the end though. the ending i would've liked to see, instead of the books ending.
custom001
05-17-04, 06:10 AM
In my opinon, most movies based on Tennessee Williams books.
Especially "A Streetcar Named Desire", "Cat On Hot Tin Roof" and "The Fugitive Kind".
Whattodo
05-29-04, 07:26 AM
LOTR novels were far superior to the film. But that's coming from a person who read them a million times when he was in middle school.
I actually felt sick reading American Psycho. Poor rats... Hah! And those poor girls. Really savage book.
kurupt
05-29-04, 09:51 AM
One more vote for Jaws
Giantrobo
05-29-04, 02:45 PM
Originally posted by Kal-El
LOTR.
Although I loved the books AND the movie I have to agree. But mostly because the book was drawn out in certain areas.
Nefarious
06-01-04, 08:57 AM
I'll agree w/ The Bourne Identity.
I definitely wouldn't consider it a great book. I read it about a year before the movie came out. The movie is much better.
Nefarious
06-01-04, 08:59 AM
Originally posted by custom001
In my opinon, most movies based on Tennessee Williams books.
Especially "A Streetcar Named Desire", "Cat On Hot Tin Roof" and "The Fugitive Kind".
Have you seen "The Glass Menagerie" w/ John Malkovich? I haven't read the book but the movie is pretty powerful.
Ginwen
06-02-04, 11:45 AM
I agree with Jaws.
The Shining, on the other hand, was a great book. My only guess about why it is getting all these votes is a. people saw the movie first, then were disappointed by the differences with the book or b. people never actually saw the movie, but liked the first movie (which didn't follow the book) better than the TV movie (which did follow the book, but wasn't as good) and assume the Kubrik movie is better than the book.
Buy: