• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Book to Movie Conversions . . ..

Schadenfreude

Schadenfreude

Lifer
I've seen my share of movies, and then some, but I think most, if not all of us agree, that in most cases where a book has been made into a movie, the book is usually better.

The only movie I've seen that is better than the book (after going through both) is Fight Club.

Any others, in your opinion, that ended up better as a movie than a book?
 
Shawshank Redemption.

It's a very very close win for the movie as it followed the book almost exactly. The only thing really different is the evil warden character was expanded in the movie to actually show some more of how much of a prick he was, and that was a good thing. Other than that though, the book pretty much served as the script for the movie.
 
Originally posted by: silverpig
Shawshank Redemption.

It's a very very close win for the movie as it followed the book almost exactly. The only thing really different is the evil warden character was expanded in the movie to actually show some more of how much of a prick he was, and that was a good thing. Other than that though, the book pretty much served as the script for the movie.
Click to expand...

I found the explanation of concrete at the time the prison was originally constructed, as covered in the book, to be a good supplement to the film. Movies pwns book, though.
 
Well, there is a book of novella's written by Stephen King. Several very good movies got their stories from them. They include Stand By Me (The Body), The Shawshank Redemption, and I forget what others and what the original novellas were called. I read a book that had like 5 of them in the one book. The stories were very good, but the movies were considerably better.

I like the LotR books and movies the same, but definitely find it easier to watch the movies than to read the books.
 
Originally posted by: darkswordsman17
Well, there is a book of novella's written by Stephen King. Several very good movies got their stories from them. They include Stand By Me (The Body), The Shawshank Redemption, and I forget what others and what the original novellas were called. I read a book that had like 5 of them in the one book. The stories were very good, but the movies were considerably better.

I like the LotR books and movies the same, but definitely find it easier to watch the movies than to read the books.
Click to expand...

The book was called Different Seasons. It had 4 novellas in it.

Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption (note: no "the" in the title)
Apt Pupil (also made into a movie... never saw it though)
The Body (movie was stand by me with wesley crusher)

and some other one I'm too lazy to google for. The story wasn't very good though. It was about some woman who got into a car accident or something and gave birth as she died on the street or something. I dunno.

Both Shawshank and The Body were excellent stories made into very very good movies. Apt Pupil was an alright story.
 
The Bourne Identity. The books are corny airport bookstore trash, but the movie was good and I'm looking forward to the sequel.
 
Jaws by Peter Benchley. Spielberg is a film making GOD for what he did to make that piece of trash not only tolerable but one of the best movies ever. The book is horrible in every sense of the word. For example, Hooper serves no purpose except as someone for Mrs. Brody to bang.

H.G. Wells' War of the Worlds. Book was interesting and I hope rumours of a faithful adaptaion are true, but I liked the movie a lot more. Things just looked much cooler and the story was told a bit better.

Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco is a VERY close split. What the movie has going for it is that it does not drag like the novel does in a lot of places.

Hunt for Red October is a case where the book and the movie both ruled.
 
Originally posted by: Wuffsunie
Jaws by Peter Benchley. Spielberg is a film making GOD for what he did to make that piece of trash not only tolerable but one of the best movies ever. The book is horrible in every sense of the word. For example, Hooper serves no purpose except as someone for Mrs. Brody to bang.

H.G. Wells' War of the Worlds. Book was interesting and I hope rumours of a faithful adaptaion are true, but I liked the movie a lot more. Things just looked much cooler and the story was told a bit better.

Name of the Rose by Umberto Eco is a VERY close split. What the movie has going for it is that it does not drag like the novel does in a lot of places.

Hunt for Red October is a case where the book and the movie both ruled.
Click to expand...

Red Dragon was a better book than a movie.

Auto Bio of Malcolm X was a better book than movie.
 
Fight Club definitely.

the movie for Fellowship of the Ring was better than the book (mostly because they took out Tom Bombadil and tightened up the timeline), but when it comes to The Two Towers and Return of the King, the books are far better than the movie.

The Return of the King movie gets some points for taking out the scouring of the shire (in the book, the chapter felt tacked on and totally out of place), but the book is still better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top