Movies that were BETTER then the Books

[Wadders]

I am Legend (Will Smith)

I really liked how they just used the book as a inspiration rather than completely ripping it off...

I disagree, completely and utterly. I won't bore you with why, or my feelings on your opinion. I just wanted you to know that I do not agree with your opinion, not one bit.

Agreed.

I didn't feel like they were inspired by the book, I felt like they bastardized it, removed all the eeriness, turned the vampire creatures into generic monsters, and removed about 1/3 to 1/2 of decent story material.

You ever seen 'The Omega Man' with Charlton Heston? That's slightly more true to to book.

 

[Scabadus]

Pride and Prejudice. I'll wait for your double take to subside... there we go. Perhaps a surprising choice, but let me explain: when I fell asleep reading the book (English coursework, I had to) I had to pick up from where I left off. When I gave up on the book and watched the film to try and get the story and also fell asleep watching that, it was over when I woke up. So, simple logic, the less time I had to spend enduring that excuse for classic literature, the better.

 

[Yassen]

Fight Club is an obvious one. Lord of the rings made the story understandable as the books were pretty difficult to read for my small mind. 'Perfume: story of a murderer' is a bit trickier though. While the book went into more detail and told us what Jean-Baptisse was thinking while he did all those horrible things, the movie had some damn impressive acting, left out the parts that felt unneccisary and added beautiful orchestral music. I'd say they cancel each other out in this case.

 

[ExileNZ]

Of Mice and Men. The book wasn't all that long and very action-based (not "guns and explosions" action but "and then he went there and did this" action) so it was easy enough to convert to film without losing out on subtleties or background information.
That and decent performances by Malkovich and Sinise, but the Lenny/Shorty clash is far better in the film and the ending doesn't drag on the way it does in the book.

 

[razormint21]

I am Legend (Will Smith)

I really liked how they just used the book as a inspiration rather than completely ripping it off...

I disagree, completely and utterly. I won't bore you with why, or my feelings on your opinion. I just wanted you to know that I do not agree with your opinion, not one bit.

Agreed.

I didn't feel like they were inspired by the book, I felt like they bastardized it, removed all the eeriness, turned the vampire creatures into generic monsters, and removed about 1/3 to 1/2 of decent story material.

You ever seen 'The Omega Man' with Charlton Heston? That's slightly more true to to book.

Now that i think about it, the movie was not really faithful to the book...

But then again, the movie is scientifically more plausible to me. And i could say, i enjoyed Mr.Smith's performance.

I respect everyone's opinion, thanks for the discussion

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

You ever seen 'The Omega Man' with Charlton Heston? That's slightly more true to to book.

It's closer but Last Man On Earth (starring Vincent fucking Price, no less) is the truest to the book.

 

[Valksy]

Lord of the RIngs trilogy. I tried to read the books but found them stale, dry and tedious and covered in shitty doggerel/"songs" that I found excruciating .

 

[Spaceman_Spiff]

It's not a movie but I have to say I have enjoyed the Dexter Tv series more than the books.

 

[Nightmist]

Watchmen.
Maybe it's because I didn't read the graphic novel in the '80 when it was supposed to be read (I was 3 when it came out) but I didn't enjoy it.
I found most roles to be badly characterised, especially Nite Owl II and Ozymandias. The former was so bland that if he turned out to be child molester in his spare time, I wouldn't have bat an eyelid. Ozymandias on the other hand [SPOILER ALERT] was given so little time to develop that when we all discovered that he was the mind behind the plot, it triggered in me the same emotional response I would have had if he declared his intention to eat a banana for breakfast.

The film fixed all that by flowing a lot better than the novel and by removing that stupid pan-dimensional monster at the end and changing it for a finale that actually made some sense.

 

[APLovecraft]

I'd have to say LotR, only because reading the books is like a brick wall with the insane detail that the book goes into describing EVERYTHING.

too f**king right, the movies are not only amazing, they can be understood

 

[Crosshead]

"Bladerunner" is a lot better than "Do androids dream of electric sheep." A very different sort of film though. The book was about ideas. The film dripped with style.

And sorry razormint, you're going to get this a lot, but "I am Legend" with Will Smith was much worse than the book. Same goes for "I, Robot" actually. Keep Will Smith away from classic sci-fi!

 

[ironduke88]

don't know if it counts but the watchmen film was far more enjoyable than the 'book', I watch/read stuff to be entertained and the film did a better job than the 'book' ever did.

same goes for LoTR...

 

[PhiMed]

I have to say Fight Club. The book is very good, but the crazed and paranoid direction of David Fincher and the absolutely brilliant performances by Norton and Pitt just put it up as one of the best films ever made. Rarely has a film based on a book taken on such a tone of its own.

And Roger Ebert didn't like it. *spits*

This

Also, The Godfather, Along Came a Spider, Catch-22. If Equilibrium's script is based on a book, I need to read it, but I can't imagine the book being much better. I guess that's more of a plug for Equilibrium. SEE IT.

I am Legend (Will Smith)

I really liked how they just used the book as a inspiration rather than completely ripping it off...

I disagree, completely and utterly. I won't bore you with why, or my feelings on your opinion. I just wanted you to know that I do not agree with your opinion, not one bit.

Just wanted to jump on the bandwagon with Angerwing here.

 

[dfphetteplace]

A Clockwork Orange. I liked the book, but the movie was much more menacing and disturbing. I could also relate to Alex in the movie, but not Alex in the book. In the book, I just figured he got what he deserved, but the director of the movie (who is a cinema god) made Alex a tangible person that I actually cared for, even if though he was for the most part a terrible person. There is one scene in the book that is much, much worse then the movie, and had it not been changed for the movie, I don't think anyone would have liked Alex. Those that have read the book know what I'm talking about.

PS, I agree with everyone on Fight Club. I thought the book had kind of a stupid ending.

 

[Wadders]

I am Legend (Will Smith)

I really liked how they just used the book as a inspiration rather than completely ripping it off...

I disagree, completely and utterly. I won't bore you with why, or my feelings on your opinion. I just wanted you to know that I do not agree with your opinion, not one bit.

Agreed.

I didn't feel like they were inspired by the book, I felt like they bastardized it, removed all the eeriness, turned the vampire creatures into generic monsters, and removed about 1/3 to 1/2 of decent story material.

You ever seen 'The Omega Man' with Charlton Heston? That's slightly more true to to book.

Now that i think about it, the movie was not really faithful to the book...

But then again, the movie is scientifically more plausible to me. And i could say, i enjoyed Mr.Smith's performance.

I respect everyone's opinion, thanks for the discussion

Yeah, I too enjoyed the film for what it was. Taken by itself, its a good movie. I just think that when one compares it to the book, it does loose out somewhat.

You ever seen 'The Omega Man' with Charlton Heston? That's slightly more true to to book.

It's closer but Last Man On Earth (starring Vincent fucking Price, no less) is the truest to the book.

I'll have to check it out
I'm assuming that it's probably not on DVD, so to the internets I shall go!

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

Kick Ass.

The book was just a little too on the nihilistic side for me to really enjoy it when it ended, whereas the movie actually made me feel like I'd had a good experience.

 

[PhiMed]

I think Jurassic Park was a way better movie than the book was. I remember trying to read it when I was a kid and thought it was not fun to read it.

I would recommend reading it again. The reason you didn't enjoy it as a child is because, unlike the movie, it isn't for kids. None of Crichton's stuff is for kids, for that matter.

 

[UberNoodle]

2001 was more enjoyable as a film, but they were written near simultaneously, and are almost the same. I just think that Clarke isn't always the most stimulating or wordsmiths.

 

[j0frenzy]

I'm kind of surprised no one has said it yet, but The Godfather is slightly better than the book. They are both really good in my opinion. Also, from my vague recollections, I believe that Runaway Jury was a tad more realistic in the movie version than the book, but it has been forever since I saw the movie.

The only two I think were better than the book were V for Vendetta and Shawshank Redemption. Although Shawshank Redemption is a short story so I'm not sure if it counts.

I whole-heartedly disagree with you on V for Vendetta. I did not like the book, but I thought it was a masterpiece compared to what I viewed as an awful movie.