This was sparked by Dumarest's statement that he prefers Lynch's Dune to the book.
Of course the truism is that the book is always better than the movie. Usually but not always true I think.
Godard wrote that it was a mistake to adapt a great novel to film, better to adapt a mediocre book into a great film. There's a real grain of truth in that I think but some would take offense at the original books being called mediocre, perhaps just 'not great'?
One example that jumps immediately to mind are two King adaptations Carrie and The Shining. Particularly the latter. Perhaps it is because I came to both after the films but I found the The Shining too rambling as a novel and the ending of the book felt more like a bad Hollywood movie ending than the actual film ending. Carrie as a film is pretty much a note perfect horror film, the book isn't bad but a bit too clumsily written for my tastes.
On the other hand I liked the first half of the film version of It, but consider the film doomed to be inferior to the book because of the intensity of King's characterization, the grotesque psychosexual content of most of its horror set-pieces and the complexity of the novel's historical structure.
Any other examples y'all can think of where you prefer the film to the book?
Probably The Godfather, for me.
Good call! Never read the book as I heard it was disappointing.
Quote from: Voros;1002035Good call! Never read the book as I heard it was disappointing.
I enjoyed the book. There is a weird subplot in it involving a surgeon, but otherwise really good read in my opinion. I like Mario Puzo's writing style. The Sicilian isn't bad either. That said, I think most people would enjoy the movie more as its so iconic.
Quote from: ArrozConLeche;1001990Probably The Godfather, for me.
Along that line, I thought Goodfellas was better than Wiseguy (Wiseguy is still good and if you like Goodfellas, there is a lot of additional info, but the movie is unbelievably good).
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1002038I enjoyed the book. There is a weird subplot in it involving a surgeon, but otherwise really good read in my opinion. I like Mario Puzo's writing style. The Sicilian isn't bad either. That said, I think most people would enjoy the movie more as its so iconic.
The surgeon subplot is what I heard about. Sounds odd. May give it a try one day. I actually prefer Godfather II to I but both films are pretty great.
The same thing could probably be said of Serpico and Donnie Brasco. Thing is that all of those, except The Godfather, were non-fiction books.
I'd say that the books enhance the movies, though, or at least changes how you interpreted a scene. Like, how did Sonny know that Paulie had sold Don Corleone out? You get an answer in the book, but in the movie, you're left to wonder if Sonny is right or not.
Quote from: Voros;1002052The surgeon subplot is what I heard about. Sounds odd. May give it a try one day. I actually prefer Godfather II to I but both films are pretty great.
It is odd, but also kind of fits with what he was trying to do. The book places more emphasis on the religious and biblical themes and so the surgeon is sort of a counterpoint to the Godfather as God. If I remember he sort of presents himself as the new priesthood, and being able to adjust a woman in that way (as weird as it is) isn't completely random the way it may seem if someone just mentions that section of the book to you.
Quote from: ArrozConLeche;1002058The same thing could probably be said of Serpico and Donnie Brasco. Thing is that all of those, except The Godfather, were non-fiction books.
I'd say that the books enhance the movies, though, or at least changes how you interpreted a scene. Like, how did Sonny know that Paulie had sold Don Corleone out? You get an answer in the book, but in the movie, you're left to wonder if Sonny is right or not.
That is a good point. But I think Wiseguy is exceptional for crime non-fiction. I enjoyed the book Donnie Brasco as well, but not nearly as much as Wiseguy. Donnie Brasco the film far exceeds the book in my opinion. But Goodfellas only exceeds the book because the film is so exceptional.
I think the Godfather book also adds a lot to the Luca Brasi character and his importance in the film makes more sense when you understand him. He is a lot more mythic in the story.
A lot of those wiseguy non-fiction books aren't often written with much stylistic ambition though, more functional than literary.
There are great non-fiction books that would be difficult to turn into an equally great film, Nick Tosches' brilliant biography of Jerry Lee Lewis Hellfire for instance.
Scorsese has been trying to make Tosches' great Dino biography into a film, would love to see that but I have my doubts he can top the book.
Quote from: Voros;1002094A lot of those wiseguy non-fiction books aren't often written with much stylistic ambition though, more functional than literary.
There are great non-fiction books that would be difficult to turn into an equally great film, Nick Tosches' brilliant biography of Jerry Lee Lewis Hellfire for instance.
Scorsese has been trying to make Tosches' great Dino biography into a film, would love to see that but I have my doubts he can top the book.
My concerns are probably a lot more lowbrow than yours when judging books. I'm not too worried about stylistic ambition when I evaluate books in general (personally I prefer a simple and engaging style). With mafia non-fiction books I've read enough of them to know just how bad some can be, and how good some can be. The quality comes in from a lot of different things (the research, the way the research is put together to construct a narrative). I tend to judge them more how I would judge a history book (with history I am far more concerned with the writer's analysis of events, and the way they choose to present events when they write the narrative, than I am with their style). For that genre, Wiseguy is about as good as it gets in my opinion.
For sure, ambition to me means more than just prose style though, a clear and engaging writing style, well researched historical detail, insight, etc. T.J. English's Savage City, Jeff Guin's Manson or the WWII history Walking Since Daybreak would be examples to me. If Wiseguy is good in that way that's what I'm also looking for.
Trying to think of other movies I like better than the books they are adapted from... I know there are a couple. The Big Sleep and The Maltese Falcon, for sure. I'll have to look over my shelf and DVD collection.
I could list a few TV series I liked better than their source material....
Quote from: Voros;1002135For sure, ambition to me means more than just prose style though, a clear and engaging writing style, well researched historical detail, insight, etc. T.J. English's Savage City, Jeff Guin's Manson or the WWII history Walking Since Daybreak would be examples to me. If Wiseguy is good in that way that's what I'm also looking for.
For me when I think good history I think people like Carlo Ginzburg, Braudel and Hourani.
Quote from: ArrozConLeche;1002058The same thing could probably be said of Serpico and Donnie Brasco. Thing is that all of those, except The Godfather, were non-fiction books.
Like, how did Sonny know that Paulie had sold Don Corleone out? You get an answer in the book, but in the movie, you're left to wonder if Sonny is right or not.
No, in the movie it is later said in dialogue how Paulie did that. Its near the end of the movie and I am sure is one of Michael's speeches.
- Ed C.
Quote from: Koltar;1002300No, in the movie it is later said in dialogue how Paulie did that. Its near the end of the movie and I am sure is one of Michael's speeches.
- Ed C.
I don't see it in the script. I'll have to rewatch. Sonny does mention the phone company connection and that Carlo made calls from a payphone, but that's it as far as I can remember.
I must admit I have yet to see a movie based on a book that was better than the book but I have seen novelizations of movies that were just ghawdawful and obviously written by a hack in a couple weeks.
Quote from: Schwartzwald;1002319...I have seen novelizations of movies that were just ghawdawful and obviously written by a hack in a couple weeks.
And there are some that are pretty good, like
Flash Gordon,
Saturday Night Fever, and
Star Trek: The Motion Picture. I was surprised at the effort made on some that are pretty much just junk tie-ins most of the time.
I found that the movie The Andromeda Strain was far better than the book of the same name, same with the original Planet of the Apes movie and its source. I'd say the same of the Dragonslayer movie and novel, but I don't know if the movie was taken from the novel or if the novel was just written as a tie-in.
The Godfather for sure - the book isn't that great at all to read.
I personally think that A Clockwork Orange is actually better than the book, although I know lots that disagree, and also Kubrik's The Shining is better than Stephen King's novel (which is probably why he hated it).
Believe it or not, The Graduate was based upon a book, but who has ever heard of the book?
There are a number of movies and TV series I later learned were based on books. An awful lot of them. One would almost think Hollywood is hard up for ideas. :p
I didn't realize MASH was a whole series of books until I happened upon the first one on a shelf somewhere and took a peek. There's an example of one where I think the TV series was better than the movie was better than the book.
Quote from: jeff37923;1002351I found that the movie The Andromeda Strain was far better than the book of the same name, same with the original Planet of the Apes movie and its source. I'd say the same of the Dragonslayer movie and novel, but I don't know if the movie was taken from the novel or if the novel was just written as a tie-in.
Yeah, Andromeda Strain I totally forgot about. The book seemed really short and wasn't especially compelling to me. The movie was pretty cool.
Never seen Dragonslayer but I think I once had the Marvel Comics adaptation.
Quote from: TrippyHippy;1002420The Godfather for sure - the book isn't that great at all to read.
I personally think that A Clockwork Orange is actually better than the book, although I know lots that disagree, and also Kubrik's The Shining is better than Stephen King's novel (which is probably why he hated it).
Believe it or not, The Graduate was based upon a book, but who has ever heard of the book?
You know I have read ACO and yes maybe the movie was better now that you remind me of it.
I prefer the book of ACO to the film by a fair bit myself.
A fair number of classic noirs are based on books, I'd say that I prefer the film version of MILDRED PIERCE and THE POSTMAN ALWAYS RINGS TWICE to the books. And Truffaut's excellent SHOOT THE PIANO PLAYER.
I'm surprised no one has brought up The Princess Bride the movie is pretty good and is well remembered and at times still quoted to day.The book on the other hand not so much.
Quote from: kosmos1214;1002459I'm surprised no one has brought up The Princess Bride the movie is pretty good and is well remembered and at times still quoted to day.The book on the other hand not so much.
I enjoyed the book, but I do think the movie is better. The book for the Neverending Story wasn't bad either.
Jaws, The Exorcist, and Planet of the Apes.
Jaws is one of the best adaptations of all time in that it spins a story that was a pulp throwaway potboiler as a novel into into a genuine classic of cinema.
Quote from: Just Another Snake Cult;1002993Jaws, The Exorcist, and Planet of the Apes.
Jaws is one of the best adaptations of all time in that it spins a story that was a pulp throwaway potboiler as a novel into into a genuine classic of cinema.
Oh, yeah, totally forgot about Jaws...the movie is so much better than the novel. They're barely even the same thing! The novel has stupid subplots like the dead cat and the Richard Dreyfus character's affair with the cop's wife. Haven't read the other two so can't comment on their relative merits vis-a-vis the book versions.
Quote from: kosmos1214;1002459I'm surprised no one has brought up The Princess Bride the movie is pretty good and is well remembered and at times still quoted to day.The book on the other hand not so much.
Really? I like the movie, but it essentially cuts out all the funny parts from the book. The movie is sweet and cute, but the book is absolutely hilarious.
The funny thing about the Dragonslayer novel, is that although it was a novelization of the movie, there was a later printing that made no mention of the movie, save in the copyright info. It has a typical fantasy novel cover, not stills from the movie.
Rambo comes to mind. Along with anything by Dan Brown. The movies derived from his novels are shit, but the books are worse.
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1003156Rambo comes to mind. Along with anything by Dan Brown. The movies derived from his novels are shit, but the books are worse.
Years ago there was a great article in Playboy called something like "The Man Who Created Rambo", where the author of the original novel
First Blood wrote about what it was like to see a minor creation explode beyond anyone's wildest expectations and his attempts to hold on to some control over it. Pretty interesting and it actually had some good writing and legal advice for wannabe artists.
Dan Brown gets a lot of (Often deserved) shit but I always thought it was actually kinda clever how he took arcane religious/historical conspiracy theories from the weirdo margins and spun a mainstream beach novel for housewives out of them.
Quote from: Just Another Snake Cult;1003283Dan Brown gets a lot of (Often deserved) shit but I always thought it was actually kinda clever how he took arcane religious/historical conspiracy theories from the weirdo margins and spun a mainstream beach novel for housewives out of them.
Yeah , especially the parts he plagiarized and cleverly made into an industry with his name on it. The folks who wrote the original material never figured out how to monetize it.
Quote from: JeremyR;1003136Really? I like the movie, but it essentially cuts out all the funny parts from the book. The movie is sweet and cute, but the book is absolutely hilarious.
The funny thing about the Dragonslayer novel, is that although it was a novelization of the movie, there was a later printing that made no mention of the movie, save in the copyright info. It has a typical fantasy novel cover, not stills from the movie.
I concur; I much prefer the novel of The Princess Bride. There is a lot of funny stuff in there that is not in the film. The film I like fairly well but isn't remotely as good as the book. It's not much more than a cutely self-aware adventure movie.
Quote from: Dumarest;1003320I concur; I much prefer the novel of The Princess Bride. There is a lot of funny stuff in there that is not in the film. The film I like fairly well but isn't remotely as good as the book. It's not much more than a cutely self-aware adventure movie.
A h...but we have a serious shortage of cutely self aware adventure movies!
Quote from: Dumarest;1002426Yeah, Andromeda Strain I totally forgot about. The book seemed really short and wasn't especially compelling to me. The movie was pretty cool.
I think all the movies based on Michael Crichton books are better than the books. Crichton writes (really good IMO) books with a message and the characters are one dimensional to serve set purposes in his message. The movies turn those dimensionless props into characters.
Quote from: Tod13;1003437....The movies turn those dimensionless props into characters.
Sometimes.
Andromeda Strain the film isn't strong in characterization, one of the strengths in the film is the cold very 70s sf vibe of it all.
Quote from: Voros;1001961This was sparked by Dumarest's statement that he prefers Lynch's Dune to the book.
I completely disagree with this, the book is simply amazing, and the Lynch version does it a huge disservice. Doesn't stop me enjoying it though. :)
That said, Dumarest (and everyone else) really ought to check out the wonderful documentary
Jodorowsky's Dune to see what brilliant insanity nearly came about, and how we ended up with the Lynch movie instead.
My vote is for
L.A. Confidential. Now I enjoyed the book immensely, but the film
nails the book's essence, in a coherent, vibrant, and fast-paced way that causes it to rise above the source material.
Quote from: Spike;1003428A h...but we have a serious shortage of cutely self aware adventure movies!
I will concede the point.
Quote from: Voros;1003584Andromeda Strain the film isn't strong in characterization, one of the strengths in the film is the cold very 70s sf vibe of it all.
Well...haven't seen it in a long while and maybe this is an indicator: I can remember the plot and the unattached single gay guy being the one burdened with the decision, but could not tell you the name of even one character without looking it up.
Quote from: Dumarest;1003605I will concede the point.
It occurred to me not long after posting that I'd missed the perfect opportunity to play on a quote from the film in question. I shall let my wordplay stir your imagination all the better by letting you imagine I was that clever the first time, rather than embarrassing myself by saying it now. Imagine how awesome that was... perfect!
Quote from: Dumarest;1003606Well...haven't seen it in a long while and maybe this is an indicator: I can remember the plot and the unattached single gay guy being the one burdened with the decision, but could not tell you the name of even one character without looking it up.
Apparently the director Wise was purposefully shooting for that lack of effect from the actors. He certainly proved capable of vivid charaterizations and performances from his actors in his terrific noir and horror films.
Theres a few where the movie ending isnt as bleak as the books ending. Or certain characters get what they deserve.
Not many though come to mind right off.
George Pal's The Time Machine might be one.
The original Posideon Adventure movie I liked more than the book.
Jaws. The Peter Benchley novel is okay, but the first two thirds of it meander through a bunch of subplots that aren't really germane to the central plot. Also, the book, which has to describe everything, just can't approach the suspense that Spielberg builds over the course of the film by spending most of it just suggesting the shark's presence. And the character of Quint is infinitely less colorful and enjoyable in the novel than Robert Shaw's screen performance.
Quote from: Achaerone;1003993Jaws. The Peter Benchley novel is okay, but the first two thirds of it meander through a bunch of subplots that aren't really germane to the central plot. Also, the book, which has to describe everything, just can't approach the suspense that Spielberg builds over the course of the film by spending most of it just suggesting the shark's presence. And the character of Quint is infinitely less colorful and enjoyable in the novel than Robert Shaw's screen performance.
Funny thing the suspense was do the stupid robot not working most of the time. Hard to say what we would have gotten if that were not the case.
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1004342Funny thing the suspense was do the stupid robot not working most of the time. Hard to say what we would have gotten if that were not the case.
For sure the robot malfunctions were a happy accident that forced Spielberg's hand.
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1004342Funny thing the suspense was do the stupid robot not working most of the time. Hard to say what we would have gotten if that were not the case.
Same thing happened with E.T.
Quote from: Dumarest;1004352Same thing happened with E.T.
That I didn't know.
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1004359That I didn't know.
Yeah, the damned bike wouldn't fly for the longest time...
Quote from: Dumarest;1004370Yeah, the damned bike wouldn't fly for the longest time...
Guess Spielberg wasn't enunciating properly.
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1004342Funny thing the suspense was do the stupid robot not working most of the time. Hard to say what we would have gotten if that were not the case.
[video=youtube;bVZ1QRbtfOM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVZ1QRbtfOM[/youtube]
Quote from: jeff37923;1002351I found that the movie The Andromeda Strain was far better than the book of the same name, same with the original Planet of the Apes movie and its source. I'd say the same of the Dragonslayer movie and novel, but I don't know if the movie was taken from the novel or if the novel was just written as a tie-in.
Im 50-50 on andromeda Strain. Despite the changes it still plays fairly well and relatively close to the book. The TV series though was just fucking horroble and stupid.
If I recall correctly about the only thing the Planet of the apes movie shares with the book is the title?
The Dragonslayer book is a novelization of the movie. Same with the Black Hole and Last Starfighter novelizations and many others.
I am one of the three people who like Jackson's Hobbit better than the book.
Edit: Blade Runner. Much better than DADOES.
[video=youtube;KfVlxmMbP0o]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfVlxmMbP0o[/youtube]
Quote from: ArrozConLeche;1004944[video=youtube;KfVlxmMbP0o]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfVlxmMbP0o[/youtube]
Cuckoo's Nest: wrong, but it's still a good movie
Girl, Interrupted: both suck, but at least the movie has hot chicks in it even if they do overact
High Fidelity: both terrible and desperately trying to be hip while simultaneously decrying hipsterism
Misery: no knowledge of either
Ghost World: both good and almost nothing alike
Fight Club is a better movie than the book. And even the author agrees.
Quote from: Michael Gray;1004995Fight Club is a better movie than the book. And even the author agrees.
Geez, it would pretty much
have to be. Have you tried reading it?
Quote from: Dumarest;1005016Geez, it would pretty much have to be. Have you tried reading it?
I thought it was an enjoyable book. I was pretty deep into mixed martial arts and muay thai when I read it though; that probably influenced my opinion. Not as good as the movie for sure.
Quote from: Achaerone;1003993Jaws. The Peter Benchley novel is okay, but the first two thirds of it meander through a bunch of subplots that aren't really germane to the central plot. Also, the book, which has to describe everything, just can't approach the suspense that Spielberg builds over the course of the film by spending most of it just suggesting the shark's presence. And the character of Quint is infinitely less colorful and enjoyable in the novel than Robert Shaw's screen performance.
Yes. I think the movie did nail it better than the book.
Come to think of it.
Jurrasic Park the movie is a bit better than the book.
And a really obscure one. The Diamond Lens. The TV show and the book diverge after a point into their own things. Both have their merits. The book delves into what the scientist saw while the show delves into the aftermath of his acquiring the diamond.
Which I think could be a subject for its own thread even. Movies that diverge massively from their source. But are still good.
Shamefully, I like the Milius Conan the Barbarian movie better than any of REH's Conan tales.
Havent seen it yet. Looks interesting but overall I've found the books better than the movies. Though the first movie was pretty good. But felt like it was its own thing alot.
The Guns of Navarone
The characters are better written in the movie and the fat is cut out of the story.
While not A movie Emma A Victorian romance had A beater tv anime then the manga as they cleaned up the pacing .
Blade Runner
The Shawshank Redemption
Forrest Gump
Stand By Me
Jaws
Psycho
Quote from: kosmos1214;1036392While not A movie Emma A Victorian romance had A beater tv anime then the manga as they cleaned up the pacing .
Record of Lodoss War the OVA was pretty damn good. But it shows only a part of the story. The TV series was ok. But followed the books a bit better.
Carlito's Way, which is an adaptation of parts of the novel by the same name and it sequel After Hours. The novels are not bad, by any means, but I feel like the character comes across a lot wiser and kinder in De Palma's script-- maybe it's Al Pacino's world weary portrayal too (not extremely far from Jonathan Banks' portrayal of Mike Ehrmantraut).
The Watchmen.
I thought the comic was drawn for shit, but the movie was awesome.
Quote from: S'mon;1035936Shamefully, I like the Milius Conan the Barbarian movie better than any of REH's Conan tales.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]2454[/ATTACH]
Quote from: vgunn;1036568Blade Runner
The Shawshank Redemption
Forrest Gump
Stand By Me
Jaws
Psycho
I'd argue that Blade Runner shouldn't be on that list. It's like comparing Starship Troopers book/movie. Both are good in their own way, but have very little in common other than general themes.
Quote from: jeff37923;1037220The Watchmen.
I thought the comic was drawn for shit, but the movie was awesome.
I thought it was drawn ok. Just horrrrribly coloured. Think the movie should have kept the alien invader angle instead of the bombs.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1037249[ATTACH=CONFIG]2454[/ATTACH]
Speaking of. I rather like the original Invasion of the body snatchers movie more than the book.
Quote from: Omega;1038169Speaking of. I rather like the original Invasion of the body snatchers movie more than the book.
I wasn't aware there was a book. Title?
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1038536I wasn't aware there was a book. Title?
"The Body Snatchers" by Jack Finney
"The Postman".
Yeah, I said it. Kevin Costner's film version was much better than Brin's novel. The main bad guys base their philosophy on Aaron Burr?? Come on! Who the hell even knows anything about Burr nowadays? And augmented supersoldiers? Sentient AIs (even if they aren't) While the Costner film was an inspiring semi-mythological portrayal of a hero's journey. Plus Tom Petty!
Also, "The Outsiders". The FFC movie was dark, gritty, and full of angst and despair, yet still hopeful. The book was very much Mary Sue fiction written by a teenage girl (while I applaud a teenage girl for actually writing a book, much less getting it published, it is what it is)
(EDIT: "Mary Sue" probably isn't used correctly above, as the story was about inserting her ideal fantasy dream boy, not self-insertion)
I rarely like movies better, but I guess I could say James Bond. I read some of the stories. They were meh-to-OK, so I guess better than the WORST Bond movies, but nowhere near the best of the movies.
Quote from: Technomancer;1038766Also, "The Outsiders". The FFC movie was dark, gritty, and full of angst and despair, yet still hopeful. The book was very much Mary Sue fiction written by a teenage girl (while I applaud a teenage girl for actually writing a book, much less getting it published, it is what it is)
Top notch movie. It's quite a thing too to see Tom Cruise, Patrick Swayze, Ralph Macchio, Rob Lowe and Emilio Estrada together in a movie. Kinda hard to shake that Stevie Wonder song off as well.
Quote from: Technomancer;1038766"The Postman".
Yeah, I said it. Kevin Costner's film version was much better than Brin's novel. The main bad guys base their philosophy on Aaron Burr?? Come on! Who the hell even knows anything about Burr nowadays? And augmented supersoldiers? Sentient AIs (even if they aren't) While the Costner film was an inspiring semi-mythological portrayal of a hero's journey.
David Brin himself has said he Liked the Movie version. He said in interviews that Costner got the mood or spirit of hist story correct.
- Ed C.
Quote from: Technomancer;1038766"The Postman".
Yeah, I said it. Kevin Costner's film version was much better than Brin's novel. The main bad guys base their philosophy on Aaron Burr?? Come on! Who the hell even knows anything about Burr nowadays? And augmented supersoldiers? Sentient AIs (even if they aren't) While the Costner film was an inspiring semi-mythological portrayal of a hero's journey. Plus Tom Petty!
So you didn't like the Postman by David Brin becuase it was science fiction. And you liked WaterWorld 2 becuase you are a big Costner fan boy.
Quote from: Headless;1039478So you didn't like the Postman by David Brin becuase it was science fiction. And you liked WaterWorld 2 becuase you are a big Costner fan boy.
Maybe it's because I saw the movie before I read the book and was expecting more PA and less SF, although I do think the story in the film was more compelling than that in the book.
And I enjoyed the film in spite of Costner, not because if him. Although it is one of his better movies.
Brin is a good writer, I just didn't care for the story he was telling.
Not a movie vs book thing, but rather a tv show vs the books: The 100.
The books are pretty standard YA fiction with not a whole lot going on. I mean, stuff happens but 3 books in and it's only about a month after they land back on Earth.
The tv show breaks free of the YA stuff pretty early on in the 1st season and turns into one of the best post-apocalypse shows on tv. More characters, that are better fleshed out and less stereotypical, action that is sometimes harsh and pretty brutal, a (mostly) well thought out post-apoc society. It is just leaps and bounds ahead of anything the books offer.
Speaking of YA fiction to film efforts.
I thought the animated adaption of Dragons Blood was pretty good compared to the book.
On the other hand I thought Red Planet changed a bit too much from the book. Its not a bad effort on its own. But it could have been named something else and still stood. Though probably still better than any live action adaption will ever be.
So disappointed in Red Planet. They should have just had Matt Damon read sciency stuff to the audience for 2 hours and it would have been better.
Quote from: Headless;1039848So disappointed in Red Planet. They should have just had Matt Damon read sciency stuff to the audience for 2 hours and it would have been better.
What fucking movie did
YOU watch?
Red Planet had Carrie-Ann Moss and Val Kilmer. There was no book.
The Martian had Matt Damon and the book was just as good as the movie. I doubt you read the book though, you don't seem to be the type into "sciency stuff" and that is the meat of the book.
Sorry yes. I was talking about the Martian.
Book was better than movie.
heh-heh. I on the other hand was talking about the Heinlein novel adaption.
Quote from: Omega;1040023heh-heh. I on the other hand was talking about the Heinlein novel adaption.
The animated one where they changed Mars to Ares?
Quote from: jeff37923;1040113The animated one where they changed Mars to Ares?
Yep. Still have the unedited version from its first airing recorded on VHS. (Which sadly may not have survived this long.)
The old Storybook Specials from CBS way back cranked out a surprising number of adaptions of YA books as well. Often with pretty good quality too. The aforementioned Dragons Blood being one.
And another one remembered today. Ice Station Zebra. The movie is pretty good compared to the book.
And the original movie The Day the Earth stood Still is damn good compared to the short story it is based on. But then they pretty much only retained the general theme.
I am kinda 50/50 on the TV adaption of The Martian Chronicles. The adaption is pretty good overall and more upbeat really. The Earth of the book is alot more bleak when you pay attention to some of the comments made throughout.
There is a series of tv movies featuring Tom Selleck called the Jesse Stone series. The books are really good, hut Selleck really sells the character in a way the books don't.
Quote from: Warboss Squee;1052632There is a series of tv movies featuring Tom Selleck called the Jesse Stone series. The books are really good, hut Selleck really sells the character in a way the books don't.
sadly they ended BC the network would not commit to more then one movie at A time.
Mentioned this one over in the movie thread.
The Lady in the Lake, a 1947 film noir movie shot totally in POV of the main character. Based on the book of the same name by Raymond Chandler. Pretty good movie really and as good as the book its based on. YMMV of course but I enjoyed the movie especially for being innovative and trying such challenging filming method and pulling off pretty darn good.
Quote from: kosmos1214;1053276sadly they ended BC the network would not commit to more then one movie at A time.
For which I am extremely disappointed.
Michael Caine's German accent notwithstanding, I thought the film version of The Last Valley was better than the book.
I enjoyed The Dead Zone as a book, but I prefer the film version with Christopher Walken by a narrow margin.
Quote from: nightlamp;1053439Michael Caine's German accent notwithstanding, I thought the film version of The Last Valley was better than the book.
I enjoyed The Dead Zone as a book, but I prefer the film version with Christopher Walken by a narrow margin.
I actually liked the mini series because it got more in depth. Don't think it was finished though.
I definitly like the original movie of The Poseidon Adventure more than the book. The book is not very pleasant and I particularly didnt like the big fuck you ending of the book.
The Peter Jackson Hobbit movies were not better than the book, and not even particularly faithful to the book, but the MUSIC was great! I could never put Tolkien's verse to music in my head, and they did a great job of that in the movies.
The book of A Clockwork Orange is better than the movie because it contains the last chapter, which was omitted in the movie and some American editions of the book. In the last chapter, Alex grows up and repents of his misspent youth, looking back on it with the perspective of middle age. It's the actual moral and ending of the story.
The original graphic novels of Valerian are much better than the movie. I didn't hate the movie, but it doesn't really do the characters justice. The art in the comics is also superb.
I prefer the Finnish TV rendering of the Hobbit. I especially like their Gandalf. It is also a little more faithful to the book. Pretty impressive for what was a stage play.
I like Bert I. Gordon's adaption of Hephaestus Plague into the movie Bugs, a bit more than the book which plods along. Though the book had a more interesting ending. And at the time I did not know it was one of Mister B.I.G's movies. Saw it at the drive-in. He also adapted Food of the Gods (twice) and Empire of the Ants.
And another one reminded of as I pack things. I very much prefer the Thundarr animated series over the book. They share very little though. The original book was more like a sort of John Carter story except flung into a distant post apoc setting rather than Mars.
The film of The Last Valley was much more interesting than J.B. Pick's novel, Michael Caine's ridiculous German accent notwithstanding.
I liked both the movie and the film versions of The Dead Zone, but the movie wins on account of the performances by Christopher Walken and Martin Sheen.