Jump to content
IGNORED

Have You Ever Liked A Movie Better Than The Book


PII

Recommended Posts

Only once, Ever.  It has otherwise never even been close, for me.  No matter how much I may like the movie adaptation, the book is always way better.

All this being the case, it got me wondering what everyone else's experience has been.

Also, Anything that was created; movie first, then cheap-o trash novel equivalent to follow, does not count (which is not necessarily to say that those cannot be enjoyable.)

Anyway, the only time this happened for yours truly was when I watched "The Night Flyer" after reading the book (which is actually a short-story.)

In particular, the final few scenes in the film were so Creep-tastic and Brutally Delicious there was just no way the written story could compare..

 

Edited by PII
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Reed Rothchild said:

Jaws, Jurassic Park, The Great Train Robbery, The Mist, Shawshank Redemption, Edge of Tomorrow, American Psycho, Carrie, maybe others.

For Edge of Tomorrow, I don't think it's really fair to compare, since they are completely different stories... the movie just borrowed some of the ideas and the underlying premise. That being said, I also preferred the movie

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first Harry Potter and Jurassic Park movies, though I enjoyed the books, too.  I don't have a great imagination for visualization, so seeing the on-screen magic of Potter or the dinosaurs of JP far outshone reading about them.

On a slightly off-topic note, the play Wicked was great fun while the book was a boring slog to get thru.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that it's been mentioned I do recall Jurassic Park being a rather dull read.  

Never knew Jaws was a book to begin with / surprised I've never even seen a copy..

Mist also seems like a very likely example even though I enjoyed the read much more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Reed Rothchild said:

Oh, The Running Man.  Come at me @Hammerfestus !  Or whoever it was.

big GIF

That was me.  
You are out of your mind.  Running Man the movie is like top 3 Arnie movies for me but the book had like a plot and stuff. I will say it was so wildly different to basically only have the same name.  Underrated Stephen King work.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Editorials Team · Posted
22 minutes ago, Hammerfestus said:

big GIF

That was me.  
You are out of your mind.  Running Man the movie is like top 3 Arnie movies for me but the book had like a plot and stuff. I will say it was so wildly different to basically only have the same name.  Underrated Stephen King work.

 

Top 3 Arnie movie > Top 30 King book 😏

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PII said:

Now that it's been mentioned I do recall Jurassic Park being a rather dull read.  

 

No way.  The novel Jurassic Park was way better then the movie.  If you were younger when you read it, some of the chaos theory stuff might have been boring, but it's still superior to the movie.  The movie was still good though since it basically followed the novel.

The film The Lost World, however, was a huge mess because it didn't follow the book at all.  It used SOME of the characters, and used the idea of a second island, but that is about it.  The novel was fantastic, but the movie was pretty bad.

Edited by TDIRunner
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Editorials Team · Posted
29 minutes ago, TDIRunner said:

No way.  The novel Jurassic Park was way better then the movie.  If you were younger when you read it, some of the chaos theory stuff might have been boring, but it's still superior to the movie.  The movie was still good though since it basically followed the novel.

The film The Lost World, however, was a huge mess because it didn't follow the book at all.  It used SOME of the characters, and used the idea of a second island, but that is about it.  The novel was fantastic, but the movie was pretty bad.

See I'm the opposite.  I read Jurassic Park as a kid and thought it was AMAZING.  Best book I'd ever read.

Then I went back to it decades later after reading lots of "adult" books... and it's a good techno-thriller.  Maybe Crichton's best.  But not like some sort of all-timer literary event.  Like, B, B- territory.  Whereas the film is a landmark in big tentpole adventure.  Something that has not aged a day in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Reed Rothchild said:

See I'm the opposite.  I read Jurassic Park as a kid and thought it was AMAZING.  Best book I'd ever read.

Then I went back to it decades later after reading lots of "adult" books... and it's a good techno-thriller.  Maybe Crichton's best.  But not like some sort of all-timer literary event.  Like, B, B- territory.  Whereas the film is a landmark in big tentpole adventure.  Something that has not aged a day in my opinion.

I have re-read it as an adult (JP and TLW are the only Crichton novels I can say that about), so I'm comfortable saying the novel is excellent.  The movie is also a masterpiece and the special effects look better than most movies made today, but to say it hasn't aged a day is a little misleading as some of the acting leaves a bit to be desired (not all, but some).  It was easy to miss years ago when we were in awe of the dinosaurs, but it sticks out pretty bad today.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...