Books turned into movies (1 Viewer)

[happy cup]

Harry Potter? The Notebook? A Walk to remember? Lord of the Rings? etc etc. Is the movie version usually better than the book?

 

[Sarah168]

harry potter books > harry potter movies

walk to remember book > movie

dont know about others.

 

[jumb]

Harry Potter? The Notebook? A Walk to remember? Lord of the Rings? etc ect. Is the movie version usually better than the book?

Obviously not becase alot of information is forfeited to make the movie shorter.

The da vinci code is being turned into a movie.

 

[Benny_]

Movies are very rarely better than the books they were based on. A few examples I can think of off the top of my head are:

Million Dollar Baby
The Shawshank Redemption
The Shining
Misery
Schindler's List
Dr Strangelove

 

[im an idiot]

the shining and misery were indeed the only 2 of the hundred stephen king movies better than the book

 

[Benny_]

Not a big fan of The Shawshank Redemption then?

 

[persephone]

the books are always better than the films. always. the films always forget something or point to something that isn't there. or add bits or take away bits. i always opt for the book over the film, but i'll still watch the film version. what i really hate is the novelisations of the film. they're just a bit crap.

 

[go_swans]

the books are always better than the films. always. the films always forget something or point to something that isn't there. or add bits or take away bits. i always opt for the book over the film, but i'll still watch the film version. what i really hate is the novelisations of the film. they're just a bit crap.

not ALWAYS! but usually.. THE NOTEBOOK movie was way better than the book

 

[happy cup]

not ALWAYS! but usually.. THE NOTEBOOK movie was way better than the book

Yeh I agree. The A walk to remember movie is also way better then the book.

 

[nick1048]

LOTR Book >>>>>> LOTR movies... they leave so much out and subvert so many images... the horror!!! Bitter sweet horror.

 

[soha]

about a boy
i remember was much betetr to read then see
so was hating alison ashley

 

[Benny_]

Nick Hornby adaptations are all pretty good aren't they. I still like the book version of High Fidelity better though, so much funnier.

 

[Benny_]

Oh oh I have a good one. The Wizard of Oz!

 

[Emily.]

books always seem to be better

 

[_Bushra_]

the books are always better than the films. always. the films always forget something or point to something that isn't there. or add bits or take away bits. i always opt for the book over the film, but i'll still watch the film version.

I TOTALLY AGREE. Books are so much more fun to read. Of course if I liked the book I will eventually watch the movie to reinforce things that i didnt get in the book (like in "The Beach". I didnt get some stuff they did in the book and the movie cleared it up for me)

I have found that the movies are prety dissapointing. All the Harry Potter movies have been pretty shit IMO

 

[Jumbo Cactuar]

Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy...

Which retard cast that movie? (no offence to retards)

Books ( and radio series I presume ) without a doubt!!! :uhhuh:

 

[bazookajoe]

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest was very close. I couldn't split the difference, as both were incredible. Jack Nicholson did an amazing job as MacMurphy, but the book was fantastic as well.
Most books are better than the movie, unless you see the movie first. The book kind of portrays your own image of the movie, so when you see it visually you're thinking "I thought he would look/do that differently".

 

[marchetta]

Books tend to be better. They're more detailed and in some movies, they usually tend to cut all the good stuff out! The House of Sand and Fog was really good...but get the feeling that the book was better.

 

[glitter burns]

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest was very close. I couldn't split the difference, as both were incredible. Jack Nicholson did an amazing job as MacMurphy, but the book was fantastic as well.
Most books are better than the movie, unless you see the movie first. The book kind of portrays your own image of the movie, so when you see it visually you're thinking "I thought he would look/do that differently".

I got so annoyed that Jack Nicholson was cast as McMurphy because he didn't fit the physical description that the author has gone to pains to express... haven't actually seen the movie though, so I can't say anything else about it.


But yeah, books are better than the movie about 99% of the time.

 

[gordo]

the book sahara was sooo much better than the movie.. to date its still one of the best books i've read.
the movie made a real meal of it, they just exchanged the intriguing story line for hollywood