The book is better than the movie

[Daveman]

Every original books is better then it's movie remake.

Lord of The Rings movie was... URGH.

I agree so long as the URGH is the sound you make when you orgasm...

I don't get why people say the LotR movie was crap (even though they're such rare cases), it just wasn't, especially the extended editions which developed Denethor and Boromir much more than the book did. The book was also quite slow paced which was better in the movie. That said I did absolutely love the books as well. But I can't accept people who say the movie was bad when it was clearly so good.

A significantly better example of shit movies vs awesome books is The Hitchikers guide to the galaxy.

 

[cleverlymadeup]

it really depends on the book, the first Punisher movie with Dolph Lundgren was crap, the second one was a LOT better and the last one was really good

i think the main issue with translation from book to movie depends on the length of the book and the movie. the longer the book, the more they have to cut out for time constraints, more so if the movie isn't very long.

there have been a bunch of books and movies that are as good as one another. however they are very rare and there is also the even rarer breed of movies being better than the book

 

[iJosh]

I like movies better because reading a 1000 paged book is too much work for me.

Yes, I am lazy. I don't like reading a whole lot.

 

[Futurehead]

What about Yes Man? I enjoyed the film but I could tell it had a certain simplistic feel to it done to make it a successful mainstream release (I can't really explain what I mean by that). Anyways my friend says the book has some major plot points that the film misses out. Can't remember what these plot points were exactly, does anyone know?

 

[A Raging Emo]

Every book ever is better than the movie. There are no exceptions.

I love books. =-)

 

[j0z]

Almost all books are better than the movies, except LotR, which I couldn't drag myself through the books but I really liked the movies. i,Robot was a good movie, but not as a movie of i,Robot by Isaac Asimov. They could have saved themselves several million dollars by not licensing the name and changing the names of a few characters, since that was the only similarities between the book and the movie

 

[Avatar Roku]

To this day, I can only think of one instance of a movie being better than its book, and that's Children of Men.

 

[Ultrajoe]

Just about every book is better than the movie with the exception of There Will Be Blood, The Sicilian and the Shawshank Redemption.

Thank jesus, there will be blood was awful 'If i've got a milkshake and you've got a milkshake, and I drink your milkshake, I've drank your milkshake'.... or something like that, that shit shouldn't pass as entertainment...

Another day, another person who can't focus on anything other than the last three minutes of the film.

I love how people can so perfectly miss the point. As the culmination of an entire film, the climax of character and theme, i'd say it's one of my more beloved moments of theatre. Ever.

Besides, even out of context the final scene is pure awesome.

 

[clipse15]

V for vendetta better movie than book

 

[Amethyst Wind]

The Golden Compass was the most insulting book > film conversion I've ever seen. They didn't even reach the climactic ending of the fucking book! They stopped about 10 minutes short!

EDIT: Also they totally glassed over some of the integral concepts of the book so the movie ended up making fuck all sense, even for someone who hasn't read the book.

Also, the acting sucked, Nicole Kidman and Daniel Craig should be ashamed of themselves.

Phil Pullman should be especially ashamed of himself for agreeing to a film conversion.

 

[the protaginist]

Just about every book is better than the movie with the exception of There Will Be Blood, The Sicilian and the Shawshank Redemption.

They made a movie of The Sicilian?


I thought The Godfather was better as a book, because the movie bored me to death, but I read the book in 3 sittings.
Also, I thought V for Vendetta was better without the jabs at the Bush Administration.

 

[klakkat]

Somehow this one hasn't been mentioned yet:
I haven't read the Fight Club book, but I've read commentary from the author of the book that said the movie was better. And the movie was pretty fucking good, so the book would have to be incredible to be better.

Big Trouble is another example. It was only better than the book for the fact that the acting was pretty good and it had Tim Allen in it. Other than that, it was the most faithful recreation of the book I've ever seen; I saw the movie about a month after reading the book and it was about a 99% accurate translation, faithfully recreating almost every detail.

As for Lord of the Rings... Well, the movies were pretty good. It's been awhile since I read the books, and they weren't the easiest read, but still good. They had a lot more detail in them which was both good and bad, so I guess the books and movies about even out in quality. Perhaps more credit can be given to the movies since they're the only fantasy setting movies I've seen in years that are worth shit (Legend and Dungeons and Dragons come to mind... ugh).

The movie 2001 A Space Odyssey was also pretty faithful to the book. It falls short a bit, but since most people have increasingly small patience, the movie is shorter.

The movie Starship Troopers somehow convinced me to read the book, and I'm glad it did. On reflection, the movie wasn't bad once you read into it; it carries over many of the themes of the book which makes it more than just a cheap action flick, if you pay attention. Still, book was way better.

Other than that, most times the book is better, provided the audience has the patience to read it. Most movies see better circulation than books do, since they're easier and faster to get through, and can be entertaining without requiring much thought.

 

[Kuropan]

Anything Stephen King has done is automatically better as a book than as a movie. Even the Shawshank Redemption, imho.

 

[cleverlymadeup]

Just about every book is better than the movie with the exception of There Will Be Blood, The Sicilian and the Shawshank Redemption.

Thank jesus, there will be blood was awful 'If i've got a milkshake and you've got a milkshake, and I drink your milkshake, I've drank your milkshake'.... or something like that, that shit shouldn't pass as entertainment...

Another day, another person who can't focus on anything other than the last three minutes of the film.

I love how people can so perfectly miss the point. As the culmination of an entire film, the climax of character and theme, i'd say it's one of my more beloved moments of theatre. Ever.

Besides, even out of context the final scene is pure awesome.

actually the funny part about that line is it was actually said by an oil baron, i think during a congressional hearing

Somehow this one hasn't been mentioned yet:
I haven't read the Fight Club book, but I've read commentary from the author of the book that said the movie was better. And the movie was pretty fucking good, so the book would have to be incredible to be better.

they are both just as good as one another. they didn't cut much out of the book at all, mostly the homo-erotic stuff between the Narrator and Tyler. other than that they book and movie are identical.

although the movie shares something with A Clockwork Orange and that is they're missing a bit at the end, although it's not as bad as Clockwork was and what they took out didn't really affect the ending

 

[The Sorrow]

I Am Legend.

 

[ExaltedK9]

it really depends on the book, the first Punisher movie with Dolph Lundgren was crap, the second one was a LOT better and the last one was really good

i think the main issue with translation from book to movie depends on the length of the book and the movie. the longer the book, the more they have to cut out for time constraints, more so if the movie isn't very long.

there have been a bunch of books and movies that are as good as one another. however they are very rare and there is also the even rarer breed of movies being better than the book

Not to get off-topic, but I liked how the first Punisher was more realistic. The newer one was too made up.

Alot was lost in the translation to the recent Eragon movie. Still good, just lacking the depth of the book.

 

[dontworryaboutit]

But I must say that Do androids dream of electric sheep is a zillion times better than the movie blade runner.

It depresses me to no end. The original film had a Phil Noir aspect where Ford would narrate over the movie. Apparently it was fantastic.

This version was never released outside of theaters.

 

[Boaal]

The book is ALWAYS better than the movies. Unfortunately a large percentage of the world in this age is ignorant and feels that "waiting for the movie" is a better alternative, afterall why tax their poor little brains further than they need too? Seriously everyone thinks they know the Lord of the Rings now, alongside Trainspotting, Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy and half a hundred other books, because they've seen the bloody film. Mention anything outside of the severely cut back films and they're about as interested as a dolphin is to a particularly round rock in the middle of the Sahara desert.
Or maybe I'm just cynical...