Films That Are Better Than The Book

[fredthe3rd]

Discounting books based on films obviously... I think Shawshank is better as a film and I haven't read it but just read a review of Atonement (absolutely brilliant film) which said it was better than the book.

Any similar suggestions?

[Sundrop]

If you haven't read the book, how can you form the opinion that the film was better? I've both read the story, and seen the film many times. In my opinion, the film is good, and it adheres closely to the storyline of the book, but the book is still better. You should read it for yourself, and then form your own opinion.

The only movie that I can think of that I consider better better than the book is JAWS

[fredthe3rd]

I haven't formed the opinion - I'm just telling you what a review said. I made that perfectly clear.

[Shasta]

I think the movie version of the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo (US) was better than the book.

Full disclosure though - I HATED the book.

Well, that's not exactly true. I hated the last two, and my hatred for tem created my hatred for a series as a whole. I actually liked the first one.

Anyway, I ramble. Excpet for the stupid change for no reason I thought the movie was better.

[Shasta]

Oh, and as for Atonement, I liked both but for different reasons. I'd watch the movie again first before I read the book again.

[guido tkp]

fredthe3rd...in response to sundrop "i haven't formed an opinion...i made that perfectly clear"

but the first line of your initial post states emphatically...and i quote : " i think shawshank is better as a film...and i haven't read it..."

i once conversed, online, with a dude regularly used to review (diss, actually) albums/songs without ever listening to them....

but, to answer the Q...the only time i ever read a book and liked the movie more was the original 'planet of the apes' movie as opposed to pierre boulles novel...which i liked, but not nearly a much as the serling written, heston starring classic

[Moderator]

When I read the post, I took it to mean that Fred had not read Atonement and that he was referencing a review of that work which said it was better as a film.

[Shasta]

I'm with both of you, here. At first I thought he was referring to Shawshank but on a second reading I realized he was talking about the Atonement review.

Let's just chalk it up to a misunderstanding, huh?

It's all love here!

[fredthe3rd]

Yeah, I regretted my response as soon as I wrote it. Just wanted to open the thread with a couple of examples rather than just the one I could think of.

Although I've now thought of a second (and its controversial) I like Dolores Claiborne better as a film - but I LOVE the book as well!

[fredthe3rd]

...and I've just read my first post and can see how it may have been misconstrued!

[Vose]

I think the movie version of the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo (US) was better than the book.

Full disclosure though - I HATED the book.

Well, that's not exactly true. I hated the last two, and my hatred for tem created my hatred for a series as a whole. I actually liked the first one.



Off topic, but this statement totally made me think of my feelings on the His Dark Materials series of books (The Golden Compass/Northern Lights was the first book). The first book was like a breath of fresh air to me - fantasy/sci-fi that didn't resemble anything else I had ever read. Then I read the 2nd book and (to me) it was awful and NOTHING like the first book. Then the 3rd book was just a mess (IMHO). The first book was so good, but it just fell apart for me from there. That made me dislike the whole trilogy.

I have to say I hate the movie version of The Golden Compass so much that I'll never watch it :) Sorry, couldn't resist!

[Shasta]

Off topic, but this statement totally made me think of my feelings on the His Dark Materials series of books (The Golden Compass/Northern Lights was the first book). The first book was like a breath of fresh air to me - fantasy/sci-fi that didn't resemble anything else I had ever read. Then I read the 2nd book and (to me) it was awful and NOTHING like the first book. Then the 3rd book was just a mess (IMHO). The first book was so good, but it just fell apart for me from there. That made me dislike the whole trilogy.

I have to say I hate the movie version of The Golden Compass so much that I'll never watch it :) Sorry, couldn't resist!

That's funny. I did not like the Golden Compass. It's the only series I can remember not finishing. Maybe I should since I'm the opposite of you!!!

[GNTLGNT]

...the movie was wonderfully well-adapted, but the "serial novel" is superior as far as this grizzly old Constant Reader is concerned...

[Mary19]

I always think the book is better, however Shawshank and Stand By Me are the best movies based on books. I'm not just saying that because they are Mr. King's, perhaps it's because they are short stories and can include most of the plot. Oh and the Green Mile!! OK, it is because they are Mr. King's, he's just simply the best..

[Sundrop]

I haven't formed the opinion - I'm just telling you what a review said. I made that perfectly clear.

It may have been perfectly clear to you, but the phrasing of the sentence was confusing to me.
There was still no need for the snark, though.

[91rewoT]

Shawshank - loved the book, loved the movie...but with King's stories, I always think the books are better...in this case, it was close to a tie, but the written word still wins!

[guido tkp]

it's the mitt, fred, isn't it...just a little too tight for such a big guy :wink2:

frankenstein and dracula both...i've enjoyed many of the movies (thought...not all) far better than i did the original books...sacriledge !!

[blunthead]

If you haven't read the book, how can you form the opinion that the film was better?


I haven't formed the opinion - I'm just telling you what a review said. I made that perfectly clear.In your original post you left out an important comma, fredthe3rd, rendering your statement not perfectly clear but clearly imperfect. :smile2:

[Sundrop]

it's the mitt, fred, isn't it...just a little too tight for such a big guy :wink2:

frankenstein and dracula both...i've enjoyed many of the movies (thought...not all) far better than i did the original books...sacriledge !!

I can agree with you on some of the Dracula movies.......although, I did enjoy the book very much.
As for Frankenstein, I really didn't like the book or the movies.

[blunthead]

This thread makes me realize how many books I still need to read, as there are so many great movies based on them which I haven't which I've seen (Gone With the Wind, Moby Dick, Dolores Claiborne, Shawshank, The Body, Vertigo [I bought a copy but I can't read French]). It also reminds me of movies I still need to see, based on books I still need to read ('Salem's Lot, Firestarter). This thread makes me feel lazy.

[fushingfeef]

Rarely does a film exceed a book, at best it can hope to equal it (such as "The Godfather"), but one movie stands out to me as being significantly better and more effective than the book:

Paper Moon.

[Spideyman]

The majority of the time I have the books to outdo the films. Films are nice, after reading the book. Let the imagination come first, the visuals second.

Fush- I'll have to watch Paper Moon.

[Todash]

I think the movie version of the Girl With the Dragon Tattoo (US) was better than the book.

Full disclosure though - I HATED the book.

Well, that's not exactly true. I hated the last two, and my hatred for tem created my hatred for a series as a whole. I actually liked the first one.

Anyway, I ramble. Excpet for the stupid change for no reason I thought the movie was better.I actually didn't read the last two because I didn't love the first one. I gave it three stars on Goodreads. Some of that might have been translation issues ... but I kinda feel like maybe because they were published posthumously, it got a bit more popularity and critical acclaim than it otherwise might have. Maybe. I would be willing to watch the movie, though, if you think it's better than the book.

Better than the book: Twilight. (I have neither seen nor read any but the first book/movie in the series, so this is only about that one.) Considering the lackluster writing and Harlequin-romance-with-sparkly-vampires theme of the book, I thought the movie improved on the book considerably. One really smart move was having the dad, the chief of police, play a bigger part in the movie. It added more meat--okay, it added pretty much all the meat--and also, it makes sense given the occurrences in the story. Having him totally "offscreen" in the book was silly and weak on the part of the author. Plus, while reading the book, I wanted to smack Bella upside her vacuous little head almost all the way through; I didn't get that irritated with the movie.

[Shasta]

... but I kinda feel like maybe because they were published posthumously, it got a bit more popularity and critical acclaim than it otherwise might have. Maybe. I would be willing to watch the movie, though, if you think it's better than the book.


I couldn't agree with you more. I would watch the movie though. It was all the interesting stuff with the boring political stuff taken out.

I'll ignore your comments on Twilight because I love all of the books and have read them multiple times, but only because I am incredibly in love with Edward. (Yes, I can't stand Bella.) And the movies don't do Edward justice.

Again, yes I am a 12-year-old girl.

[fredthe3rd]

...and I've just read my first post and can see how it may have been misconstrued!

Do I need to apologise multiple times?

[Shasta]

Do I need to apologise multiple times?

NO! Let's all just move on!!

[doowopgirl]

I read Atonment and disliked it so much that I have no interest in the film. Shawshank works equally well as a film and a book IMO. I thought Delores Clairborne was a much better book. My best example of a film that was better than the book is Forrest Gump.

[fredthe3rd]

Ah Forrest Gump... I've not read the book, but I've read the Wikipedia page, it may spoil your enjoyment of the film... Follow the link and go to Author Controversy section, it might leave a sour taste in your mouth: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forrest_Gump

[Jojo87]

Tommyknockers are really not a movie I think but have to say that I liked the movie/series version better than
the book.

[Todash]

I couldn't agree with you more. I would watch the movie though. It was all the interesting stuff with the boring political stuff taken out.

I'll ignore your comments on Twilight because I love all of the books and have read them multiple times, but only because I am incredibly in love with Edward. (Yes, I can't stand Bella.) And the movies don't do Edward justice.

Again, yes I am a 12-year-old girl.
Better not read my Goodreads review of Twilight, then. It's heavy on the snark. :rofl:

[gypsycrow]

I thought the LOTR trilogy were better movies than the book. The books could have used an editor--and that's what the movies did; stayed true to the story and the characters without the long lulls.

[Shasta]

Better not read my Goodreads review of Twilight, then. It's heavy on the snark. :rofl:

That's it. I'm un-friending you! :wink2:

[Tim D.]

I couldn't agree with you more. I would watch the movie though. It was all the interesting stuff with the boring political stuff taken out.

I'll ignore your comments on Twilight because I love all of the books and have read them multiple times, but only because I am incredibly in love with Edward. (Yes, I can't stand Bella.) And the movies don't do Edward justice.

Again, yes I am a 12-year-old girl.

Oh, it truly breaks my heart to have ran across your admission to being a Twilight fan. Seeing the words "I am incredibly in love with Edward" makes me want to stab my eyes with hot pokers.

[Shasta]

Oh, it truly breaks my heart to have ran across your admission to being a Twilight fan. Seeing the words "I am incredibly in love with Edward" makes me want to stab my eyes with hot pokers.

Have you READ Twilight? Until you do you may not judge, Buffy.

[Tim D.]

Have you READ Twilight? Until you do you may not judge, Buffy.

Of course I have not read Twilight and I never intend to. It's one of those cases where reading it is not necessary to know that it is horrible. It's just a non-disputable fact, like the sun is hot or water is wet. I don't even need to try and engage in an intelligent conversation about Twilight. In fact, the phrase "intelligent conversation about Twilight" is an oxymoron. It can't be done.

[jimson]

At least as far as Stephen King goes, I'd say none.

For close I'd say The Green Mile, Shawshank Redemption and Stand by me.

Lesser would be Misery and the original Shining, (so removed from the book it almost doesn't count, but a great movie anyhow) I though It was pretty good, PennyWise was incredibly creepy. If I can lump TV adaptions in, I also liked Desperation, just because the filming location and sets fit the book so well.

Then the field gets crowded with "pretty decent" like Bag of Bones. Pet Semetary, The Dead Zone, Firestarter, Cujo, The Stand mini series.

There are still many I haven't seen, but among the worst of the bunch, I'd put Christine. Maybe not fair since the book was the one that started it all for me.

[Shasta]

Of course I have not read Twilight and I never intend to. It's one of those cases where reading it is not necessary to know that it is horrible. It's just a non-disputable fact, like the sun is hot or water is wet. I don't even need to try and engage in an intelligent conversation about Twilight. In fact, the phrase "intelligent conversation about Twilight" is an oxymoron. It can't be done.

You may not judge until you've read it. Anything. So there. If you do you are one of "those" people and you don't want to be one of "those" people.

I couldn't agree more about the intelligent conversation thing. The writing and the story is awful but Edward is sexy so he makes up for all the bad. See. Nothing intelligent there.

[Tim D.]

You may not judge until you've read it. Anything. So there. If you do you are one of "those" people and you don't want to be one of "those" people.

I couldn't agree more about the intelligent conversation thing. The writing and the story is awful but Edward is sexy so he makes up for all the bad. See. Nothing intelligent there.

Nope. You have been judged, condemned and sentenced to hang. When it comes to Twilight I'm proud to be one of "those" people. Someone has to be on the side of what is good and right and just and stand between the decent Americans and the swooming, rabid tweeny bopper Twilight hordes who threaten to undermine the very fabric of our society.

And just for the record any respect I had for you as a rational, intelligent adult was just completely swept away by your meltdown into prepubescent lust with the words "Edward is sexy so he makes up for all the bad." To which I can only counter: Edward Schmedward.

But you're still my favorite :17_002:

[jimson]

Wow, there are a lot of minefields to navigate here. I lent my Kindle to my teenage daughter one time and it came back with one of the hunger games books on it.

Am I in danger of banishment?

[Lily Sawyer]

Wow, there are a lot of minefields to navigate here. I lent my Kindle to my teenage daughter one time and it came back with one of the hunger games books on it.

Am I in danger of banishment?

Only if it was accompanied by a Justi- wait, no.....I won't type it out completely. Better to let sleeping dogs (and this one truly is a bow-wow arfarf) lie.
(I've not read The Hunger Games, so I haven't a clue as to whether you are no longer one of the Cool Kids.)

[atomicinchworm]

Twilight is terrible. And Edward is a jerknozzle. I have read the first one. I couldn't bring myself to care past that. To be fair, romance novels aren't my thing, especially romance novels full of badly wirtten Mary and Gary Sues.

I will have to see what the movies do with Hunger Games. I thought the first book was a really solid example of YA fiction, the second book left something to be desired, and the third book made me very very angry because it was so so bad. It could have been good! But it was terrible. (If your protagonist wakes up at the beginning of nearly EVERY SINGLE CHAPTER you aren't doing it right, and your story needs some serious tweaking.)

As some of you know, I am a Gaiman fangirl (I do not use that word lightly). However, Stardust the movie is superior to Stardust the book. I love most of Gaiman's work, but Stardust just didn't jive with me.

[atomicinchworm]

I thought the LOTR trilogy were better movies than the book. The books could have used an editor--and that's what the movies did; stayed true to the story and the characters without the long lulls.

I agree. I can recognize how important LOTR was to the fantasy genre (and I have read the trilogy more than once), but it is...a product of it's time. It doesn't help that it is a story about the World that happens to have some characters in it. I tend to prefer character heavy stories (which, btw, is why I love Les Miserables, despite all of Hugo's pontificating) and that isn't what LOTR is ultimately focused on.

[Evil Queen]

I also like 'Jaws', the movie, better than the book. I recently finished 'The Turn of the Screw' and although I enjoyed it, I can honestly say I liked the movie better.

[Shasta]

But you're still my favorite :17_002:

I better be! :pigupset:

(I bet you knew a pig was coming.)

[Shasta]

Am I in danger of banishment?

Nope, you're safe. For some reason that seems to get a pass here.

[Shasta]

As some of you know, I am a Gaiman fangirl (I do not use that word lightly). However, Stardust the movie is superior to Stardust the book. I love most of Gaiman's work, but Stardust just didn't jive with me.

I love Stardust as both a book and a movie, but I agree that the movie is better.

[Neil W]

Wow, there are a lot of minefields to navigate here. I lent my Kindle to my teenage daughter one time and it came back with one of the hunger games books on it.

Am I in danger of banishment?

Not with me. I zipped through all 3 at the start of the year and thought they were excellent. And I'm an old man.

[fredthe3rd]

Not with me. I zipped through all 3 at the start of the year and thought they were excellent. And I'm an old man.

I did the exact same thing in February! Really enjoyed them. (and it had a Stephen King quote on the back cover!)

[arista]

I liked the Green Mile movie and book. I thought both put in pretty strong performance.

[Chris1974100]

I liked the Green Mile movie and book. I thought both put in pretty strong performance.

I agree both versions are excellent

[blunthead]

The Shining. Just kidding. :36_002:

[Haunted]

Shawshank - loved the book, loved the movie...but with King's stories, I always think the books are better...in this case, it was close to a tie,


but the written word still wins!

I just finished reading Shawshank and I have not seen the movie but I believe you are right on spot here. Reading about why a character is the way he/she is and how they interact with the world around them (character development) is what I love about Mr. King's books.

[Haunted]

The Shining. Just kidding. :36_002:

Oh, I really hope so!!

[Haunted]

As I mentioned I just finished reading ...Shawshank Redemption and was surprised that our Jake is a pigeon???? HUH??? Sir Brian, is there some history here??

[fredthe3rd]

The Shining is one of my favourite horror films. If it had been more true to the book... it wouldn't have been nearly as good. What works in a book doesn't necessarily work in a film.

[SharonC]

I found Congo (the movie based on the book by Michael Creighton) far more entertaining than the book itself. Usually, it's the other way around. I must admit that I watched the movie first, and then I bought the book. I found the book incredibly boring.

[nate_watkins]

I found Congo (the movie based on the book by Michael Creighton) far more entertaining than the book itself. Usually, it's the other way around. I must admit that I watched the movie first, and then I bought the book. I found the book incredibly boring.

That is sometimes his style. I still found some of his more boring stories a bit interesting because of all the research he put into his work. I guess people who knew him called him a workaholic. I don't remember much of the book or movie Congo, but I do remember some of his books being much better than others.

[Haunted]

IMHO, Crichton always dropped the story toward the end.