The "Shining"
REDRUM,REDRUM, REDRUM
Movies Better Than The Book
by littlerockguy 24 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
CaptainSchmideo
The Natural, by Bernard Malamud: The movie treats Roy Hobbs like Thor with his enchanted Hammer (or bat, I guess...), the book ends with Roy in disgrace, spit upon by former devoted young fans.
I have to agree about Lord of the Rings. JRR Tolkien needed an editor, his son needed writing lessons (Silmarillion, anyone?)
The Godfather, definitely, definitely. As Mario Puzo himself said, "If I knew that book was going to be so popular, I would have written it better."
"I, Claudius". Okay, not really a movie, but the 1976 miniseries really makes the characters come to life much more that Robert Graves' subdued prose.
"Dune" by David Lynch. Oh oh, look at the screaming fans coming at with torches now! But at least there was something in the movie that the book lacks:Action! The Dune series has got to be the most boring series I have ever read! Talktalktalktalktalk, chapter break, where something big happens between the bottom of page 101, and the top of page 102 (but you don't get to see it), then talktalktalktalktalk. Makes "I, Claudius" the book read like Indiana Jones in comparision.
Frankenstein-Another book that everyone thinks they know, but no one can get past page 10 without needing life saving efforts by a medical staff. The original version is good, the Bride of Frankenstein is incredible (the biggest Gay Pageant ever brought to the screen, even bigger than "La Cage aux Foiles" or even "Top Gun"!). Even "Young Frankenstein" is better written than Mary Shelley's version, and covers even more philosophical ground.
A movie that I did not think was as good as the book, but recieved so much praise it made me wonder if anyone else ever read the book, was "Mystic River". Sean Penn's anguished face aside, I felt the hurt of a father's loss a lot more powerfully in the book than in the movie. I guess it helps when you can get in the characters heads in a book, which you can't do in a movie.
-
Spectre
I got half way through the second LOTR book before I just couldn't take it anymore.
The big one for me is Ghostworld. I love the comic-book/graphic novel (I even have my hardcover signed by Dan Clowes), but it wasn't written with the idea of making a movie out of it. Clowes did have a lot of input into the changes and it's one of my favorite movies.
-
IsaacJS2
I agree that the Lord of the Rings movies were better than the book. And I read the books first, BTW. I got them after reading the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, having heard it was kinda similar...and was disappointed. Too much pointless wandering off the trail for the characters for me.
Blade Runner is another, though it wasn't that much like Androids Dream of Electric Sheep any way. They had little to do with one another. I liked the original movie better than the Director's Cut.
One thing of interest. I hated the Star Wars prequels, but the book for Episode 3 (which was based on the movie rather than the other way around) was WAY better than the movie. I actually gave a crap about the characters in the book and every thing!
IsaacJ
-
JWdaughter
I tried reading LOTR for YEARS, many attempts. Because it is literature, don'tcha know! I finally gave up. . .I liked the movies better, but I confess, I fell asleep a couple of times during the series. . .I fall asleep a lot in movies. . .
-
SacrificialLoon
I agree that the LOTR movies are better than the books. I just couldn't get through the books. I read The Hobbit, The Fellowship of the Ring, and I got about a third of the way into The Two Towers. It was very plodding and tedious.
Let's spend a chapter talking about a tree, then in the next chapter the elves will sing a song about the tree! A bit of an exageration, but it seemed like it at times. Maybe I'll make another attempt sometime.
-
deeskis
Hi LRG,
maybe not on the same literary standing as some already mentioned.........but I so loved the novel Angela's Ashes, and yet imo, it turned into the most dreariest, plotless, movies of all times :(
-
needproof
Misery - Stephen King masterpiece turned into a movie - now that was better than the book. I say masterpiece since although I don't think it was written well, it was a master plot. The movie was great. I once had a nightmare that Kathy Bates was standing outside my French Doors at night with a typewriter and a shotgun, not good!
-
LoverOfTruth
Most Books are better than Movies. One that stands out for me is "The Autobiography of Malcolm X" by Alex Haley. The Movie was great but the book was awesome.
-
gaiagirl
Although I watched the 1930's Universal "Frankenstein" films from a very early age, and enjoyed them, I did find the original 1816 novel quite good as well, and read it cover to cover at age 9. Admittedly, writing styles have changed dramatically in the nearly 200 years since it was put down on paper, and it doesn't move along quickly by modern standards. Similar observations could be made about the writings of Jules Verne, H.G. Wells, Arthur Conan Doyle, or H. Rider Haggard, all very popular writers in the 19th and early 20th century. One major point which was present in the novel but got lost in the movie was the theme of how personality is shaped by treatment and environment. In the novel, the monster is grossly ugly, but strong and agile, like an Olympic athelete. Initially naive and childlike in behavior, he is also intelligent and learns to speak and write fluently. He is a "super-human" in all ways except appearance. Unfortunately, every encounter with humans is marred by their reaction to his ugliness, and he eventually learns to hate all humans, becoming the evil monster they believe him to be. The movies lost all of this, making him evil from the beginning, and making the theme of the story more along the lines of "humans should not meddle in the affairs of Gods". Perhaps a much better version of the film was "Mary Shelly's Frankenstein", with Robert DeNiro as the creature. DeNiro almost breaks your heart when he is driven away from his only friend, the old blind man, by horrified family members.