Results 1 to 15 of 36

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Registered User MoonDoggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Miskatonic University
    Posts
    27

    Better than the book?

    Like most avid readers I usually say, "The book is so much better than the movie." However, there have been times when I actually liked the movie better than the book. The Postman is one of them and Practical Magic is another. In both cases I saw the movie first and decided to read the book afterwards.

    How about the rest of you? Do you think it matters which you're exposed to first?

  2. #2
    Quitters Inc. is a Stephen King story from the movie Cats Eye that I thought was compelling and had a shocking twist at the end in the movie, but was just "meh" when I read it.

    I'll go so far to say that Starship Troopers was a great summer action flick, better than the book for excitement and action. I'm not saying this movie was better than the book in general, but they made the movie that a lot of people wanted and did a good job.

  3. #3
    Registered User Loerwyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    6,233
    I'm not really of the idea that adaptations are necessarily worse than the text they're from. See, what happens is people have their own ideas, visions and so forth and in a bizarre way it colours what they see because it's not their interpretation.

    I enjoyed the three Narnia films, Coraline, The Black Cauldron, No Country For Old Men, True Grit (the recent one) and other interpretations though I wouldn't say they were better than the book (if I'd read it).

    One of the few that was at least on the same level as the book that I know of is Persepolis, and it has to be watched in French.

  4. #4
    Registered User SilentDan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    A house on a hill somewhere in Australia.
    Posts
    189
    Blog Entries
    4
    Lord of the Rings.

    What?

  5. #5
    Registered User JimF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Quebec, Canada
    Posts
    584
    I thought the Watchman movie was better than the graphic novel, but only by a little. I never really liked the squid.

  6. #6
    Registered User Aktunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    135
    I felt that both the movie and book versions of Watchmen had strengths and weaknesses, but the endings, I felt that the movie version was far better than the alien squid thing in the book.

    If you want a great example of a show that actually surpasses the written material, look no further than True Blood. Don't get me wrong, I also own the books and enjoy them, but the show brings so many of the characters to life in a way that you don't get in the books. Also, the show has trimmed out a lot of the unneeded stuff from the books.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by SilentDan View Post
    Lord of the Rings.

    What?
    Lord of the Ring is a movie, and its very nice and good movie i really like it..

  8. #8
    Damn fool idealist DailyRich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    1,681
    I have to agree with Action Avenue, the novel Jaws is pretty weak sauce. There's just no build to it. Hooper's affair with Brody's wife is laughable, as is the subplot of the mayor wanting to keep the beaches open because he needs the money to pay his mob debts. And in the end, the shark just sinks because they finally injured it enough. Really unsatisfying.

  9. #9
    Let me be your gateway Chekhov's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    The City on the Edge of Forever
    Posts
    291
    I would rather watch than read The Fellowship of the Ring for the sole reason that it cuts out the pointless chapters about Farmer Maggot and Tom Bombadil. Of course, I would just skip them anyway.
    Quote Originally Posted by Loerwyn View Post
    One of the few that was at least on the same level as the book that I know of is Persepolis, and it has to be watched in French.
    Uh... why?

  10. #10
    Hobbit film, by a mile. Also the Game of Thrones tv series is a gazillion times better than the books.

  11. #11
    Too many books to read... Siberian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    407
    Quote Originally Posted by Chekhov View Post
    I would rather watch than read The Fellowship of the Ring for the sole reason that it cuts out the pointless chapters about Farmer Maggot and Tom Bombadil. Of course, I would just skip them anyway.
    Uh... why?
    They might be less relevant to the main plot (and thus justifiably cut from the movie) but they're far from pointless. For once, they provide a transition between the cozy life in the Shire and a far more dangerous larger world (similar to Mos Eisley in the original Star Wars movie). Old Forest is very dangerous, but still not on the scale of, say Moria or Mordor. Old Man Willow is an ancient evil that exists outside of Sauron and the Old Forest itself is a precursor to Fangorn. Buckland and Old Forest chapters are also important for the hobbits' character development. Pippin and Merry don't join Frodo on a whim. They're good friends concerned with his well-being and they actually prepare for their travels (i.e. they're not stupid). It's also the hobbits' first ever adventure that shows that the hobbits can be very brave and loyal to each other but not yet quite ready to be on their own. Tom Bombadil himself is an interesting puzzle as he's the only create in Middle-earth not affected by the Ring. Finally, there's the creepy scene in the Barrow Downs where Frodo acts as a hero who saves his friend (in the movies he's mostly damsel in distress needed to be saved by others). And of course, Merry gets his blade that will help slaying the Witch King. Getting them from Aragorn is far less interesting.

    See? You don't have to like those scenes but they're far from pointless.

  12. #12
    HBO's True Blood is better than the Sookie Stackhouse books they are based on. At least the first 4 seasons, then it might be a coin toss.

  13. #13
    Let me be your gateway Chekhov's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    The City on the Edge of Forever
    Posts
    291
    Quote Originally Posted by Siberian View Post
    They might be less relevant to the main plot (and thus justifiably cut from the movie) but they're far from pointless. For once, they provide a transition between the cozy life in the Shire and a far more dangerous larger world (similar to Mos Eisley in the original Star Wars movie). Old Forest is very dangerous, but still not on the scale of, say Moria or Mordor.
    We already have that with the scenes in Hobbiton and Bree.
    Old Man Willow is an ancient evil that exists outside of Sauron and the Old Forest itself is a precursor to Fangorn.
    So's Durin's Bane but we didn't get a whole chapter about him. Besides, the movies include Old Man Willow (though that part was moved to Fangorn, and it's Treebeard who rescues them) and mention the link between Fangorn and the Old Forest.
    Buckland and Old Forest chapters are also important for the hobbits' character development. Pippin and Merry don't join Frodo on a whim. They're good friends concerned with his well-being and they actually prepare for their travels (i.e. they're not stupid). It's also the hobbits' first ever adventure that shows that the hobbits can be very brave and loyal to each other but not yet quite ready to be on their own.
    The way Frodo and Sam meet Merry and Pippin is contrived in the movie but we still got that character development when they decided to go with them and help them escape the Nazgul. In fact, I might like it more that they become good friends over the course of their journey instead.
    Tom Bombadil himself is an interesting puzzle as he's the only create in Middle-earth not affected by the Ring.
    Everyone always says this in defense of him, but I don't believe he deserves an entire chapter which includes visiting his house and meeting his wife, and all we get out of it is a mystery that was never answered.
    Finally, there's the creepy scene in the Barrow Downs where Frodo acts as a hero who saves his friend (in the movies he's mostly damsel in distress needed to be saved by others). And of course, Merry gets his blade that will help slaying the Witch King. Getting them from Aragorn is far less interesting.
    That I will grant you. That is a scene which should've been included at least in the special edition, since it creates a plot hole where Merry's sword can still kill the Witch-King even though it's not ever hinted at that it has any special power; it's just an ordinary sword. Instead, the movie goes with the "no man of woman born" trope (and Merry is a hobbit, not a man, so it's excusable).
    See? You don't have to like those scenes but they're far from pointless.
    Maybe not entirely, but I don't feel they justify taking such a long detour from the main plot. Cutting them in the movie was a wise move since otherwise the journey to Rivendell would've taken two hours.

  14. #14
    Registered User oceanworld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    80

    Thumbs up Book vs. Movie

    Quote Originally Posted by MoonDoggie View Post
    Like most avid readers I usually say, "The book is so much better than the movie." However, there have been times when I actually liked the movie better than the book. The Postman is one of them and Practical Magic is another. In both cases I saw the movie first and decided to read the book afterwards.

    How about the rest of you? Do you think it matters which you're exposed to first?
    I think it really depends on the person if they are a reader or not. Me I'm both I could go either way. There are books that I have read and then seen the movie or vice verse seen the movie then read the book. When it comes to the movie it depends on who is writing and directing and producing the movie since these are the people that can make or break a movie as well as the actors.
    How did seeing the movie first then reading the book turn out for you?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •