The movie vs. the book

[Joyciemc]

This was inspired by 'Sophie's Choice'
I read the book over the summer (believe it or not, I had very little idea what it was about) and loved it. It was so moving and captivating, just amazing.

So I added it to my Netflix list and just watched the movie this week. And while I can appreciate that it's a very good movie and the acting (Meryl Streep was fantastic) was incredible, it just did not have the same impact on me as the book did.

So I got to thinking... are there any movies made from books that you watched after reading that didn't disappoint?

 

[puffkin]

The Notebook. I think the movie was much better than the book!

 

[apirateslifeforme]

Off the top of my head...

Bram Stoker's Dracula (the Francis Ford Coppola version, with Gary Oldman and Winona Ryder)
Interview With the Vampire
The Lord of the Rings trilogy
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and Sleepy Hollow (of course, I just love anything Tim Burton does, especially if Johnny Depp is in it)

 

[ckay87]

I could talk forever on this topic! I almost always think a book is better than a movie. Literature is the only way we can see inside the hearts and minds of the characters. It can be done to an extent on film through use of great actors, but even that relies on the viewers interpretations of their acting.

Most recent film/book comparison I've done was Revolutionary Road. Watched the film right after reading the book. I enjoyed the movie because I read the book. Otherwise, I'd guess that most people would have found the movie boring. For that one, you'd really have to know what's going on in the characters' minds for the story to be at all meaningful.

Only time I sided with a movie over a book was Forrest Gump. It really is my favorite movie, but the book was awful and nothing like the movie. As I recall, in the book Gump was just plain stupid, with no depth at all.

 

[XYSRUS]

No.

 

[GoodFairies]

The Princess Bride - movie is better than the book
The Prestige - both are great; but the movie brings the story to life in a most amazing way.

 

[Pakey]

The only ones I can think of are the 3 Lord of the Ring movies.

 

[barkley]

now i did this one in reverse-saw the movie then read the book.

midnight in the garden of good and evil. given the time constraints the move had and the actual number of trials and events that occured in the real life situation i thought it was a good adaptation.


i also thought the film 'zodiac' based on graysmith's book was well done. the only real issue i had with it was they did'nt touch on the other vallejo murders that are strongly believed to have been zodiac's work. all in all they did a great job with a very detailed book. i think another movie in the same vein is 'helter skelter'-very detailed book with a great deal to cover, but the aspects they chose to cover they did well.

 

[Chicago526]

Silence of the Lambs is probably the best book-to-movie adaption to date, IMO. Also very good are:

Hunt for Red October
The Client
Lord of the Rings trilogy

 

[FergieTCat]

I always find the books better than the movies. I can't think of one movie that I liked better than the book, although I haven't seen the ones listed here.

 

[daannzzz]

"The Other" 1972
Written by Thomas Tryon.
Though some things were changed from the book, the look and feel and mood all were exact. Never has a movie come so close to the book for me. Of course Thomas Tryon produced it.

 

[shrubber]

The Godfather

Movie much better than the book

 

[shrubber]

Also,

Jaws
Wizard of Oz
The Shining
Jurassic Park
One flew over the cookoo's nest (sp?)

 

[suejai]

The Lord of the Rings Trilogy are the only movies that come close. There were some things in the screenplay that they changed to make a better movie but I think altered the story too much. The books are still better but the movies are almost as good.

Other than that I think the book is always better.

 

[krnlmustrd]

I hated the Twilight book, but found the movie not horrendous.

 

[Halloweenqueen]

How ironic....I was just thinking about this subject. I LOVE the book The Road, by Cormac McCarthy. The movie adaption is coming out next weekend and I plan to see it. I love Viggo Mortensen, who will play The Father.

The previews seem to suggest that the movie is straying from the book. I hope not.


The Harry Potter books are FAR better than the movies. The movies have been entertaining and well cast, but they just scratch the surface when it comes to the complexity fo the books.

 

[MomofKatie]

I can't think of a movie that is better than the book (that I've ever seen/read, at least). Lord of the Ring trilogy comes close, only because the battle scenes in the books can get a little long and a bit too dry for me. The movies held my interest more.

And, I just have to say, daannzzz, your signature pic is precious!!

 

[amy4bruce]

I have to agree with The Godfather. The novel was an overripe potboiler, the film is a classic. The only reason the novel is still in print is that it has Marlon Brando's picture on it.

An interesting case is The Maltese Falcon, widely considered to be a) the best private eye novel every written and b) the best private eye film ever made. Which is better? Uh, I'd have to rate it a toss-up.

I can think of a number of films that were better than the books, but it boils down to the fact that film and prose are two very different media. If a film remains too close to the novel, that often destroys it. You have to tell the story in the language of the medium, and so the emotional reaction can be totally different. The novel The Exorcist by William Peter Blatty tried, and succeeded, in being very creepy, building up suspence and fear over the entire book. The movie was forced to go for the gut very quickly, because that's the nature of film.

I've been thinking about this for a very long time. I've written it down. I can now think of other things.

 

[MinnieMe87]

A Walk to Remember. I loved the movie, but thought the book was awful.

 

[Ride Junkie]

I second Jurassic Park. I loved the movie, but the book was full of technical mumbo-jumbo. The movie also had a lot more humor than the book (if there even was any in the book).

I also agree with the Harry Potter series. I like the movies, but the books contain so much more detail. I'm always a little disappointed about the things they leave out.