Movies Better Than Their Books

[ChrisL]

Lord of the Rings and Hannibal Lecter movies for the exact same reason - the movies trimmed out all the meandering, annoying, unnecessary fat the novels had, which made the plot feel a lot more streamlined and better-organized in general.

The Shining - I'm glad Kubrick cut out of all the sappy family melodrama crap of Stephen King's book and completely focused on the more cold-blooded, mysterious, chilling aspects of the story.

Hellraiser - I didn't really like Clive Barker's The Hellbound Heart because it felt too manic and the story felt really cluttered and scrambled. But the movie's plot felt a lot more clear and focused.

Carrie - Brian DePalma's 1976 movie was so much more shocking and fiercely flamboyant and visceral than King's pedestrian first novel. It had the kitchen-crucifixion scene of that evil mother that the book didn't have.

The only movies that did justice to the book that I have seen are Gone With The Wind, Shawshank Redemption, Green Mile that I can think of off the top of my head.

I never read LOTR books or The Hobbit, but LOVE the movies.

I was supposed to read The Hobbit and Lord of The Rings for an elective I took called Tales and Legends. I never read them though. I just kind of winged it and got an A because the teacher liked me. Lol. What a punk I was. I did see the first Lord of The Rings. It was pretty good. I was entertained.

I read Bram Stoker's Dracula, and NONE of the movies can compare to it for me. Now that was an excellent book, so creepy too.

 

[Correll]

Books with a LOT of freaking characters and places in them, can become much easier to follow when made into movies.

You don't have to, with the beginning of each chapter, or sometimes even paragraphs, placing the character and the place, which in my opinion interferes with getting into the story.


Lord of the Rings benefited from that a lot, and does Game of Thrones.

 

[AsianTrumpSupporter]

Trainspotting

The book was good, but it was so chaotic and crazy to read. It's still a good read, but the movie was much better.

That was one of the weirdest movies ever! Remember the baby on the ceiling? That was really quite creepy. The toilet scene? Gross.

Yeah, that part of the movie was basically like a horror movie. The book is even more grim than the movie from what I can remember.

 

[Montrovant]

Lord of the Rings and Hannibal Lecter movies for the exact same reason - the movies trimmed out all the meandering, annoying, unnecessary fat the novels had, which made the plot feel a lot more streamlined and better-organized in general.

The Shining - I'm glad Kubrick cut out of all the sappy family melodrama crap of Stephen King's book and completely focused on the more cold-blooded, mysterious, chilling aspects of the story.

Hellraiser - I didn't really like Clive Barker's The Hellbound Heart because it felt too manic and the story felt really cluttered and scrambled. But the movie's plot felt a lot more clear and focused.

Carrie - Brian DePalma's 1976 movie was so much more shocking and fiercely flamboyant and visceral than King's pedestrian first novel. It had the kitchen-crucifixion scene of that evil mother that the book didn't have.

The only movies that did justice to the book that I have seen are Gone With The Wind, Shawshank Redemption, Green Mile that I can think of off the top of my head.

I never read LOTR books or The Hobbit, but LOVE the movies.

I recently read The Green Mile for the first time. The movie was very true to the book (or maybe I should say books, wasn't it originally a bunch of short books?). Shawshank is one of my favorite movies, and I'd probably put it on equal footing with the book, but there's a bit more difference between them than with Green Mile. Both are definitely excellent movies.

Shawshank was a mini novel..like The Mist...in one of Kings condensed books of short stories. Yes, both were excellent movies.

The story was called Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption. It was a novella, which I guess is when it's too long to be a short story but not long enough to be a novel. It was published in Different Seasons, which also had Apt Pupil, The Body (which became Stand By Me, also a good movie), and The Breathing Method. I read The Mist in his book of short stories called Skeleton Crew, but apparently it was first published 5 years prior to that in an anthology called Dark Forces. I hadn't realized The Mist was also a novella, but I guess it was. I definitely preferred the novella of The Mist to the movie.

 

[Montrovant]

Lord of the Rings and Hannibal Lecter movies for the exact same reason - the movies trimmed out all the meandering, annoying, unnecessary fat the novels had, which made the plot feel a lot more streamlined and better-organized in general.

The Shining - I'm glad Kubrick cut out of all the sappy family melodrama crap of Stephen King's book and completely focused on the more cold-blooded, mysterious, chilling aspects of the story.

Hellraiser - I didn't really like Clive Barker's The Hellbound Heart because it felt too manic and the story felt really cluttered and scrambled. But the movie's plot felt a lot more clear and focused.

Carrie - Brian DePalma's 1976 movie was so much more shocking and fiercely flamboyant and visceral than King's pedestrian first novel. It had the kitchen-crucifixion scene of that evil mother that the book didn't have.

The only movies that did justice to the book that I have seen are Gone With The Wind, Shawshank Redemption, Green Mile that I can think of off the top of my head.

I never read LOTR books or The Hobbit, but LOVE the movies.

I was supposed to read The Hobbit and Lord of The Rings for an elective I took called Tales and Legends. I never read them though. I just kind of winged it and got an A because the teacher liked me. Lol. What a punk I was. I did see the first Lord of The Rings. It was pretty good. I was entertained.

I read Bram Stoker's Dracula, and NONE of the movies can compare to it for me. Now that was an excellent book, so creepy too.

I very much liked the Dracula with Gary Oldman. I never read the book to compare it to, though.

 

[ChrisL]

Lord of the Rings and Hannibal Lecter movies for the exact same reason - the movies trimmed out all the meandering, annoying, unnecessary fat the novels had, which made the plot feel a lot more streamlined and better-organized in general.

The Shining - I'm glad Kubrick cut out of all the sappy family melodrama crap of Stephen King's book and completely focused on the more cold-blooded, mysterious, chilling aspects of the story.

Hellraiser - I didn't really like Clive Barker's The Hellbound Heart because it felt too manic and the story felt really cluttered and scrambled. But the movie's plot felt a lot more clear and focused.

Carrie - Brian DePalma's 1976 movie was so much more shocking and fiercely flamboyant and visceral than King's pedestrian first novel. It had the kitchen-crucifixion scene of that evil mother that the book didn't have.

The only movies that did justice to the book that I have seen are Gone With The Wind, Shawshank Redemption, Green Mile that I can think of off the top of my head.

I never read LOTR books or The Hobbit, but LOVE the movies.

I was supposed to read The Hobbit and Lord of The Rings for an elective I took called Tales and Legends. I never read them though. I just kind of winged it and got an A because the teacher liked me. Lol. What a punk I was. I did see the first Lord of The Rings. It was pretty good. I was entertained.

I read Bram Stoker's Dracula, and NONE of the movies can compare to it for me. Now that was an excellent book, so creepy too.

I very much liked the Dracula with Gary Oldman. I never read the book to compare it to, though.

Is that the one with Winona Ryder? That was the most accurate one that I've seen and was the best one. It kind of captured the creepiness of the book. The book though . . . really scary and creepy. The whole set up and atmosphere that it creates is like . . . supernatural.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Movies Better Than Their Books

There are none.

I agree.
It's very difficult if not impossible to bring a book to life.

It can happen, but very, very rarely.

Yep...your imagination is a far better director than any movie mogul.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Lord of the Rings and Hannibal Lecter movies for the exact same reason - the movies trimmed out all the meandering, annoying, unnecessary fat the novels had, which made the plot feel a lot more streamlined and better-organized in general.

The Shining - I'm glad Kubrick cut out of all the sappy family melodrama crap of Stephen King's book and completely focused on the more cold-blooded, mysterious, chilling aspects of the story.

Hellraiser - I didn't really like Clive Barker's The Hellbound Heart because it felt too manic and the story felt really cluttered and scrambled. But the movie's plot felt a lot more clear and focused.

Carrie - Brian DePalma's 1976 movie was so much more shocking and fiercely flamboyant and visceral than King's pedestrian first novel. It had the kitchen-crucifixion scene of that evil mother that the book didn't have.

The only movies that did justice to the book that I have seen are Gone With The Wind, Shawshank Redemption, Green Mile that I can think of off the top of my head.

I never read LOTR books or The Hobbit, but LOVE the movies.

The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings are the only books I've read more than once.
I've tried reading past favorites again but knowing what's coming takes away the magic.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Books with a LOT of freaking characters and places in them, can become much easier to follow when made into movies.

You don't have to, with the beginning of each chapter, or sometimes even paragraphs, placing the character and the place, which in my opinion interferes with getting into the story.


Lord of the Rings benefited from that a lot, and does Game of Thrones.

Books with too many characters can be tedious.
Especially when you enjoy one plot line over the others.

 

[Gracie]

The Mist did not stay true to the book. But..they still did well with the movie.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

Charlotte's Web (I prefer the animated copy.)
Fudge A Mania
The Outsiders

God bless you always!!!

Holly

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Charlotte's Web (I prefer the animated copy.)
Fudge A Mania
The Outsiders

God bless you always!!!

Holly

The Outsiders!!!
Wow,thanks for bring back old memories!!
I was around 13 when I read that the first time and I think I'll go back and try and read it again.
I'll never forget the scene where he he went into a gang fight with a trash can over his head and swinging a bat!

Funny how you remember scenes in a book...that was 39 years ago.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

^^^ I was 14 when I was introduced to the book and film in my 9th grade English class. C. Thomas Howell (Pony Boy) is my favorite of the film.

God bless you and him always!!!

Holly

P.S. May Darry (Patrick Swayze) rest in peace.

 

[DGS49]

Prince of Tides
The Body ("Stand by Me")
The Bible

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

^^^ I was 14 when I was introduced to the book and film in my 9th grade English class. C. Thomas Howell (Pony Boy) is my favorite of the film.

God bless you and him always!!!

Holly

P.S. May Darry (Patrick Swayze) rest in peace.

Pony Boy!! I was trying to remember the name.

 

[WillMunny]

Movies Better Than Their Books

There are none.

Uh, I just think you need to compare more novels and their movies then. It'll give you more perspective when it comes to storytelling in general.

 

[WillMunny]

It depends on a lot of different things I guess. Of course they are going to have to put a lot more in a book than in a movie for imagery purposes. They have to set a tone and atmospheres and since that is done with words in a book as opposed to pictures, well, you see what I mean.

I think I understand what you're saying, because books and movies are very different mediums of entertainment. So what works well in one may not work at all in the other.

 

[WillMunny]

my wife reads erotica
do you know where i am going with this?

Actually I do, because my own sexual imagination is so creatively sick, it's much hornier and better than any porno I've ever seen. The biggest reason I don't bother with other people's erotica is that I think it's boring.

 

[WillMunny]

Lord of the Rings and Hannibal Lecter movies for the exact same reason - the movies trimmed out all the meandering, annoying, unnecessary fat the novels had, which made the plot feel a lot more streamlined and better-organized in general.

The Shining - I'm glad Kubrick cut out of all the sappy family melodrama crap of Stephen King's book and completely focused on the more cold-blooded, mysterious, chilling aspects of the story.

Hellraiser - I didn't really like Clive Barker's The Hellbound Heart because it felt too manic and the story felt really cluttered and scrambled. But the movie's plot felt a lot more clear and focused.

Carrie - Brian DePalma's 1976 movie was so much more shocking and fiercely flamboyant and visceral than King's pedestrian first novel. It had the kitchen-crucifixion scene of that evil mother that the book didn't have.

The only movies that did justice to the book that I have seen are Gone With The Wind, Shawshank Redemption, Green Mile that I can think of off the top of my head.

I never read LOTR books or The Hobbit, but LOVE the movies.

I've read them all and I can promise the movies' plot lines made more basic sense.

 

[WillMunny]

Lord of the Rings and Hannibal Lecter movies for the exact same reason - the movies trimmed out all the meandering, annoying, unnecessary fat the novels had, which made the plot feel a lot more streamlined and better-organized in general.

The Shining - I'm glad Kubrick cut out of all the sappy family melodrama crap of Stephen King's book and completely focused on the more cold-blooded, mysterious, chilling aspects of the story.

Hellraiser - I didn't really like Clive Barker's The Hellbound Heart because it felt too manic and the story felt really cluttered and scrambled. But the movie's plot felt a lot more clear and focused.

Carrie - Brian DePalma's 1976 movie was so much more shocking and fiercely flamboyant and visceral than King's pedestrian first novel. It had the kitchen-crucifixion scene of that evil mother that the book didn't have.

The only movies that did justice to the book that I have seen are Gone With The Wind, Shawshank Redemption, Green Mile that I can think of off the top of my head.

I never read LOTR books or The Hobbit, but LOVE the movies.

I recently read The Green Mile for the first time. The movie was very true to the book (or maybe I should say books, wasn't it originally a bunch of short books?). Shawshank is one of my favorite movies, and I'd probably put it on equal footing with the book, but there's a bit more difference between them than with Green Mile. Both are definitely excellent movies.

Shawshank was a mini novel..like The Mist...in one of Kings condensed books of short stories. Yes, both were excellent movies.

I read the Shawshank Redemption many years ago. It was a pretty good novelette but I think I liked the movie a little bit better. In that case it's close between the two.