Book to film / TV...

[Guest Eliza1]

I prefer to read the books first , if I don't and I watch the film, I won't bother reading the book. The book is in most cases 100 times better than the film anyway so I'd read the book everytime.

[samfarrell]

Films based on books are never ever as good as the book, don't u think ppl???

[Kell]

There are some exceptions to that general rule.

 

I thought The Princess Bride every bit as good as the book - it was incredibly faithful and delivered onevery level.

[ladymacbeth]

Mostly.

 

Forrest Gump is a notable exception.

[ian]

Mostly true, yes. There are very few films I have seen, having read the book, that didn't in some way disappoint. Maybe a scene that was in the book, that didn't make it to the film. Perhaps a character that "feels" different on screen from what it was between the pages.

 

Most times it's just that the book is too long for a 1.5 to 2 hour film to do justice to. That's why some short stories work better as films IMHO.

 

You can actually use Stephen King stories for examples of all of the above;

 

Lawnmower Man - no resemblence to story - awful

 

Salem's Lot - follows story for most part, but swaps physical characteristics of the vampire and his familiar - which doesn't make much sense.

 

Shawshank redemption - follows the book almost exactly and is excellent. One niggle. When they tar the roof, and Andy tricks the guards into bringing them all a beer. In the book, the beer is warm (the guards revenge); in the film, it's icy cold. A little thing I know, but it still niggles!

 

Ian

[Kell]

Stand By Me (which was the story, The Body, which was in the same book as Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption) is another King short story that was an excellent film...

[Kidsmum]

I'm reading The Wizard of Oz to my youngest DD at the moment & I have to say I think I prefer the movie as it' s more exciting than the book.Also The World according to Garp I thought the movie was better than the book

[Endless]

It all comes down to fact that book has more time to develop the story and characters and has more time for you to experience the settings, the characters ETC.

A book makes you feel like you actually there if a book is well written it makes you connect with the material.

 

A film to doesn’t do that most film are only two hours long so they don’t have time for the depth.

 

Books are easily better than their adaptations but there a rare cases like Forrest Gump and Jaws

 

[ian]

In defence of the film, at least we didn't have to suffer the completely unecessary sex scene that's in the book of jaws!

 

Ian

[nursenblack]

I thought The Notebook film was far better than the book by Nicholas Sparks. Usually when I compare a book to a movie I enjoy the detail of the book better. I do think the Harry Potter movies are as equally wonderful as the books.

I think of it as comparing two artistic mediums, like comparing a sculpture of a bird to a painting of the same bird. However, it is sooo disappointing to see a scene or character that is different from what is expected after reading a novel.

[Ruth]

Generally I think books are better - more detail, character development etc.

 

There are a few films which I thought were better than the book though. Much as I like Annie Proulx, and thought the short story Brokeback Mountain was very good, I much preferred the film - in fact it's one of my all time favourites.

 

I also read The Devil's Advocate by Andrew Neiderman, a few years ago. Without question it's in my list of top 5 worst books I've ever read. But the movie based on it was pretty good. Not brilliant, but enjoyable.

[Amesy]

I would say 2 of Stephen Kings Books...

 

1. Shawshank Redemption
   
2. The Stand
   

 

The Shawshank book cast "Red" as a White Ginger bloke but obviously The god that is Morgan Freeman is neither of those and I think it changed the relationship between Red and Andy considerably (for the better, in case of the film.)

 

The Stand book was just long and boring and didn't hold my attention at all but I found the films (2 Parts) were actually very well directed and entertaining.

Edited November 17, 2010 by Amesy

[Kylie]

The Shawshank book cast "Red" as a White Ginger bloke but obviously The god that is Morgan Freeman is neither of those and I think it changed the relationship between Red and Andy considerably (for the better, in case of the film.)

 

I love that they referenced this in the film, with Andy asking why they call him Red.

[phill_01]

Lord Of The Rings was an excellent example of how to make the cross over from book to film. It was done well and was told from fans point of view.

[ladymacbeth]

Agree. I've never been a LOTR fan (have always got bored and abandoned the two towers). But I watched some the behind the scenes documentaries on the DVD of Fellowship of the Ring -- it's very clear that the makers of the film are rabid Tolkien fans and went to great pains not to corrupt the story.

 

I have thought of occasions where the book is always worse than the movie - when someone writes a book based on an original screenplay. Never works.

[poppyshake]

They almost tipped it over the edge though didn't they. There were plans to have Arwen fighting at Helms Deep and I think that would have been ridiculous but thankfully they thought of another way of getting Liv to feature in The Two Towers ... great films though.

 

On the whole movie adaptations are poor. I like the Harry Potter films but they cannot compare to the books .. there is so much detail in the books. I liked the first Narnia film and thought they kept pretty faithful. The movie Bridget Jones I thought was much better than the book. I'm not good at watching films based on books I love though .. I tut and hmphh my way through them and it's a pain for anyone who's with me. I think though if they get the casting right they can take liberties with the plotline and get away with it (as the Harry Potter movies do.) Emma Thompson's Sense & Sensibility I thought was fantastic Inkheart, on the other hand, I was really disappointed with.

[Guest Eliza1]

Dolores Claiborne, another Stephen King. It's a brilliant book and the film is quite good, it doesn't leave much out. Mystic River followed the book quite closely too. In general though, I prefer the books, definately

[BigWords]

The first two Godfather films, Fight Club and Battle Royale manage to balance the adaptive requirements with a touch of class. Those films more than make up for all the thousands of horrible films which manage to mangle the source material and - in the case of Battle Royale - manage to raise the profile of the original text in the process. It really doesn't matter that a film adaptation is a complete waste of time and money, because nothing that film producers do has any effect on the novels. The worst film, in regards to the Stephen King films noted above, must be regarded as Running Man, which swapped out a dark, dystopian thriller for a camp, clumsy, embarrassing mess of bad 80s FX and cheesy one-liners. If you go back and read the original, it's actually a horrifically prescient tale which foreshadows the financial crisis, reality television, 9/11 and a host of social maladies which plague us. The film? It's basically Arnholt running around in a gaudy jumpsuit being spectacularly stupid.

[Yellow Wallpaper]

I agree that The Notebook film was better than the book. That is the only one I can think of off the top of my head though.

[pickle]

I should add Blade Runner into the mix its a great film and a great book (Do Androids dream of electric sheep) not sure the two can be compared but for me the film has beautiful cinematography and score as well as being Rutger Hauer's best roles.

[SueB]

I much prefer reading a book to the films especially Harry Potter for example but that might just be me................I've read Twilight and recently read New Moon and although I've seen Twilight I've no interest in the other as the film (I have debates with my daughter about this lol)!

 

I read P.S. I love you and loved it...bought the film in Asda for about £5 watched half and hour then switched it off.

 

 

Think it depends on how good the film is, how much it sticks to the book and the individual.

[Ktrn]

Ah, you should watch Adaptation. (Movie from 2002, directed by Spike Jonze.) Among other things, it's about adapting books to film scripts...

 

Fight Club is great both as a book and as a movie, for example. Of course it's impossible to maintain exactly how stylish the narration was, but the cinematography was cool and made up for it. Other than that, I can't recall many...

I'm reading Shutter Island now. I've read about half so far, but it seems the film is quite faithful to the original. The film has its faults, but I think it did justice to the book.

[GerryLuvzBookz]

Two recent ones I have watched:

 

 

Tamara Drewe - The film is a rather witty British comedy on love and sex. The title character Tamara Drewe is played by the very beautiful Gemma Arterton. Not many other notable appearances, but all of the characters are hilarious. The film is based on a comic strip/graphic novel by the same title. That comic strip was regarded as a modern reworking on Thomas Hardy's novel "Far from the Madding Crowd." I noted several references to Hardy's work. Didn't really have any expectations going into it and I ended up thoroughly enjoying it.

 

 

 

 

Justified - a show on FX. New season actually begins tonight. The first season was extremely entertaining. I picked it up on DVD recently. A contemporary cowboy show, with an old-school "no B.S." lead character in Timothy Olyphant. He plays U.S. Marshal Raylan Givens. The series is based on some stories by Elmore Leonard. I think the show's creators did an excellent job. Very enjoyable.

 

[chesilbeach]

I'm hoping to see Never Let Me Go next week, as I've just read the book.

 

You might be interested in this thread about book to film adaptations http://www.bookclubforum.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/7536-books-made-into-films/page__p__235155__hl__adaptations__fromsearch__1#entry235155

[Kell]

I've now merged all the "book into film and TV" threads.