Earn cash as you plan. Get a $20 gift card for every 200 points with The Knot Rewards
Snarky Brides
What movie is BETTER than the book??
With all this talk about books and reading and movies, I thought I'd ask everyone - are there any cases where the movie is actually BETTER than the book??
I've been sitting here for a while and I honestly can not think of one instance where the movie was better...unless the movie came out first. Anyone have any to share?
I've been sitting here for a while and I honestly can not think of one instance where the movie was better...unless the movie came out first. Anyone have any to share?
This discussion has been closed.
Re: What movie is BETTER than the book??
Hold while I research...
I would remove Hunger Games, because I thought the first book was great, and I would maybe throw in Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.
And most movies are based on books, but sometimes a popular movie will be turned into a book just for extra profit. I can't think of one off the top of my head but I always see "A novel based off of the hit movie "..."" in the book store when I'm looking around
[QUOTE]I agree, Hunger Games should not be on that list. And I really liked the Dragon Tattoo books, although the movie was phenomenal. And most movies are based on books, but sometimes a popular movie will be turned into a book just for extra profit. I can't think of one off the top of my head but I always see "A novel based off of the hit movie "..."" in the book store when I'm looking around :)
Posted by aloisk57[/QUOTE]
I found a list of 50 movies, but I didn't post the link. Half of them I seriously didn't even know there was a book. Like Jaws or the Godfather.
Just because of the way they did the scene when he fought himself. I thought the movie Fight Club was better than the book.
But that is the only one I thought was better.
[QUOTE]Ooh what about the movie <strong>Carrie?</strong> The book was written weird but I really liked the movie. I'm referring to the original here.
Posted by Edie Bee[/QUOTE]
Shoutout to the movie I was named after!
(My parents are quirky)
Photographer - Steve Belner, of Photovisions
Check out my cooking blog, SERIF & SPICE!
Our wedding has been featured on a wedding blog!
[QUOTE] I purposely try to watch movies before I read the books, because I think there is a bias that once you've lived in the book during reading it, you're automatically going to be hyper-critical of the movie.
Posted by entropicbeauty[/QUOTE]
I agree, but I think for suspenseful stories, I'd rather be in a book than a movie. I enjoy the overall experience more if I read it first. Only a few times have I loved a movie so much that I go back and read the book. I much prefer to read it first.
Photographer - Steve Belner, of Photovisions
Check out my cooking blog, SERIF & SPICE!
Our wedding has been featured on a wedding blog!
[QUOTE] I purposely try to watch movies before I read the books, because I think there is a bias that once you've lived in the book during reading it, you're automatically going to be hyper-critical of the movie.
Posted by entropicbeauty[/QUOTE]
<div>While I do agree I'm probably over critical of a movie based on a book I've read, I wouldn't exchange that for reading the book first. I always find it interesting to see how I've imagined characters, worlds, etc. be brought to life by someone else's imagination. I sometimes really like what they do, other times not so much. I find that when I see the movie first, someone else's mind has created that imagery for me, and I can't think of anything else while reading it. I saw the first Harry Potter movie before reading the books, and I will now always imagine all the main characters to look the way the do in the movie - even when I've read the whole series 3 times.</div>
Photographer - Steve Belner, of Photovisions
Check out my cooking blog, SERIF & SPICE!
Our wedding has been featured on a wedding blog!
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: What movie is BETTER than the book?? : While I do agree I'm probably over critical of a movie based on a book I've read, I wouldn't exchange that for reading the book first. I always find it interesting to see how I've imagined characters, worlds, etc. be brought to life by someone else's imagination. I sometimes really like what they do, other times not so much. I find that when I see the movie first, someone else's mind has created that imagery for me, and I can't think of anything else while reading it. I saw the first Harry Potter movie before reading the books, and I will now always imagine all the main characters to look the way the do in the movie - even when I've read the whole series 3 times.
Posted by B2Z728[/QUOTE]<div>
</div><div>That is fair, I will admit it's harder to get the characters out of your mind or see things differently if you've seen the movie first, but if a book is well-written enough, I find my imagination will take care of the rest. </div><div>
</div><div>I acknowledge I'm an odd-ball for this, but I can still thoroughly enjoy a book after seeing the movie adaptation of it. I will also admit to being a movie fiend, so it is my preferred method of story-consumption.
</div>
When I was younger I loved Arnold Schwarzennegger movies and watched them religiously. One of the them was The Running Man. Then I read the book. They are so far apart on what they are about. At the time I liked the movie better, because duh Ahhhnold was in it. Now, I don't know, the book is pretty good.
Side note...The movie Starship Troopers rocks as a totally stupid movie. The book it is based on...AMAZING! It has the same name, basic plot, but it goes so much deeper. If you haven't read the book because of the movie, please reconsider.
[QUOTE]I liked the movie Stardust, which came out about 6 years ago, better than the book by Neil Gaimen. It may be because I think I'm not the biggest fan of his writing style for some reason. I completely stopped reading one of his other books, American Gods, because I just couldn't get into it.
Posted by B2Z728[/QUOTE]
This! This is how I feel exactly.<div>Also, I tend to like movie-musicals better than the books they were based on. Examples that come to mind are Mary Poppins and Phantom of the Opera and Wizard of Oz.</div>
[QUOTE]I like the Lord of the Rings movies better than the books, but that is just because I find Tolkien overly dry and detail-oriented...NMS. I also like the movie The Counte of Monte Cristo...not sure I like it BETTER than the book, but I like them both for different reasons, and I think it's one of the better adaptations of a book where the things they changed enhanced the movie rather than ruining it. I purposely try to watch movies before I read the books, because I think there is a bias that once you've lived in the book during reading it, you're automatically going to be hyper-critical of the movie.
Posted by entropicbeauty[/QUOTE]
I agree about Lord of the Rings -- the books are way too detail oriented.
I loved the Count of Monte Cristo (move) and I hated the book. For some reason it really bugged me. Moll Flanders (the one with Robin Wright-Penn) was a great movie based on a horrible book. It kind of reminded me of Forrest Gump. He's lovable in the movie, and kind of a jerkwad in the book.
The only other one I can think of is Chocolat. I LOVE LOVE LOVE the movie. The book is just okay.
planning
I had the same Harry Potter problem as PP - saw a few of the movies (didn't much care for the early ones either) before I read the books. I really enjoyed the books but the characters were definitely hard to picture any differently than the movie characters.
[QUOTE]Fight Club?!? better than the book? Thats interesting, I LOVE chuck palnuick(sp) just the way he writes is amazing...Have you read invisible monsters?
Posted by brittany634[/QUOTE]
It was only the way they changed that one part. It almost made more sense in the movie.
yes I have! I love him too. my next one I plan on reading is survivors
The movie Notes on a Scandal was better than the book IMO.
The movie Into the Wild was, to me, as well done as the book, though they took some liberties that would piss me off if I were the family.
[QUOTE]A Walk to Remember and The Notebook by Nicholas Sparks. There was one part in the A Walk to Remember book that was good, it explains an aspect of the movie that bothered me. Other than that I'm not a fan of Sparks' writing style and the stories come off as, well, boring. The film makers give the stories more much-needed drama. And I'm not one that needs too much drama, so that's saying something.
Posted by Simply Fated[/QUOTE]
I would have to agree. I think Nicholas Sparks movies are much better than the books. Ones that come to mind are The Lucky One and Last Song. I enjoyed the movies but the books are painfully slow.
[QUOTE]Fight Club?!? better than the book? Thats interesting, I LOVE chuck palnuick(sp) just the way he writes is amazing...Have you read invisible monsters?
Posted by brittany634[/QUOTE]
What?! I had no idea there was a fight club book. I'm going to buy it at lunch. Thanks!
PS - I LOVE chuck palnuick, so I'm super excited right about meow.
;)