Films that were better than the Books

Discussion in 'Movies and Television' started by Pretty In Pink, Dec 14, 2013.

  1. Pretty In Pink

    Pretty In Pink Valued Member MAP 2017 Gold Award

    I think it's a tough one. I'm goin to lay down some ground rules for your decisions.

    Rule 1. The film must be HEAVILY based on the book. I.e, same plot, same characters. For instance the Bourne series wouldn't count because the books are vastly different from the films.

    Rule 2. I can't think of anything right now.

    So right off the bat I'm going to start with fight club. I feel it condenses the book really well and the plot twist works even better in the film :D
     
  2. Rand86

    Rand86 likes to butt heads

    The Godfather 1 and 2 take a book that was essentially softcore porn with gangsters and turn it into a cinematic epic with all-star cast.
     
  3. boards

    boards Its all in the reflexes!

    The Mark of Zorro. The book was pretty meh, the 1940 version with Basil Rathbone and Tyrone power was a classic adventure with one of the great fencing scenes of all time.
     
  4. Giovanni

    Giovanni Well-Known Member Supporter

    i was going to say godfather also. another i've thought of is "gone with the wind". yes, i read it one summer in greece because my mother had it around and i got sucked in.

    i think it has to be a book that's so-so, allowing the movie to overtake it. it's hard to find any good book where the movie adaptation would be better.

    although, one film that i thought did a terrific job against a great book was "no country for old men".
     
  5. philosoraptor

    philosoraptor carnivore in a top hat Supporter

    The Shining was a pretty spectacular movie, and I think that King is a pretty humdrum writer. Jurassic Park was an awesome movie, and a pretty good book.
     
  6. Wildlings

    Wildlings Baguette Jouster

    A clockwork orange.
    Liked the movie, the book was a bit meh.
     
  7. Bozza Bostik

    Bozza Bostik Antichrist on Button Moon

    I much prefer the book, I think it's Burgess' Nadsat that does it for me - Excellent stuff. The film is pretty bad. I don't get the Fight Club choice either...I guess it's due to the fact that the film focuses more on the fight club and has a lot more violence in it, while the book deals more with the protagonist's insanity. *Sigh* Damn kids! ;)

    Lord of the Rings. The books bore me, the film's are good though.
     
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2013
  8. Bozza Bostik

    Bozza Bostik Antichrist on Button Moon

    Oh, The Life of Brian. Better than that book, bit too preachy for my tastes. I liked the way they just cut out a lot of the extra stuff and focused on the main character too. The humour in the book just doesn't work...much better on film!

    Sorry Chadderz, I think I broke Rule 1 of your Book-Film Fight club there.
     
  9. Thomas

    Thomas Combat Hapkido/Taekwondo

    It's very rare for me to say a movie is better than the book. That said, I think Bladerunner is better than the book (Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep)

    I also think some books that written based on movies are weak, e.g. all of the Star Wars movie books except for the original George Lucas one (episode 4)
     
  10. aaradia

    aaradia Choy Li Fut and Yang Tai Chi Chuan Student Moderator Supporter

    Can we include TV shows too?

    M*A*S*H

    TV show was much better than both the book and movie.
     
  11. Ben Gash CLF

    Ben Gash CLF Valued Member

    The Princess Bride is the obvious one. Book has some issues, film is pure awesome.
     
  12. Ben Gash CLF

    Ben Gash CLF Valued Member

    Oh, and The Two Towers, book is pretty dull.
     
  13. Mushroom

    Mushroom De-powered to come back better than before.

    Hunger Games.

    Because I know in a movie version I know exactly how long I'm going to suffer through it.
     
  14. Ben Gash CLF

    Ben Gash CLF Valued Member

    I was pleasantly surprised by the first film.
     
  15. Rand86

    Rand86 likes to butt heads

    I think beyond the broad strokes it's pretty much apples and hand grenades comparison.
     
  16. Van Zandt

    Van Zandt Mr. High Kick

    Sorry Chadderz, I'm going to break your rule and say 'The Bourne Identity.' It had the same characters and a similar plot, it just did it better. Besides, don't films miss huge chunks out of books and do them differently anyway?

    'Lord of the Rings' trilogy was better than the books. The books were a snoozefest in comparison.
     
  17. John Titchen

    John Titchen Still Learning Supporter

    No, the Bourne tv series character was a completely different one to the books. The books were awesome, the films substituted good plots and character development for action scenes.
     
  18. Bozza Bostik

    Bozza Bostik Antichrist on Button Moon

    I haven't read the book for a good few years but if I remember right, City of God worked better as a film than a book.

    The book is really a bunch of short stories with (sometimes) interconnected characters, the film focused on a specific group and followed them, cutting out the weaker stories and characters.

    Books with short stories can work better as films I think.
     
  19. Southpaw535

    Southpaw535 Well-Known Member Moderator Supporter

    Eragon. They took a series of books that would've taken a lot of time and money to convert to film so made one film that condensed it and killed off the main villians for the next 3 books to get rid of all the unecessary stuff like plot and character development.

    As a legit answer though I think the Grinch was better in film
     
  20. Ben Gash CLF

    Ben Gash CLF Valued Member

    While I enjoyed the action in the first film, the book was a much more effective thriller with a much more gripping plot. In the past I've said that the plot is too anchored to time specific characters for a faithful production, but there's been a spate of films set in the 70s and 80s recently, so who knows? It does take the key plot elements though, just changes their relevance somewhat.
    The second book is WAY better than the film, but also entirely different, the film basically just taking unused plot elements from the first book and mashing them into a generic conspiracy theory thriller.
    The book of The Bourne Ultimatum is actually a bit of a mess. Long, confusing and with an unsatisfying climax, which is a shame as it also has some very good elements. The film is awesome, could watch it time and again, but is completely unrelated to the book.
     

Share This Page