# movies that were NOTHING like the book



## Rook (Sep 6, 2011)

I've always enjoyed the movie _Forrest Gump_, but when I sat down to read the novel (by Winston Groom) I was startled at how little they had in common. I've also experience it the other way, where a book I read and loved gets made into something unrecognizable and disappointing (I'm looking at YOU, _Starship Troopers_!)

Obviously, books and film are different media and you can do things in one version that you can't (or shouldn't) do in the other, but has anyone else had the experience of "adaptation shock?"


----------



## Lindafaye (Mar 29, 2012)

Shirley Temple movies! Good grief! 

Heidi and Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm come to mind right away. Other than being "spunky" title characters, the movies just didn't do the books justice at all!


----------



## bordercollielady (Nov 21, 2008)

I know it hasn't come out yet - but I cannot believe that Jack Reacher will be played accurately by Tom Cruise.... nah...


----------



## Ren (Aug 9, 2012)

"The Lawnmower Man" was different.

Vastly so.


----------



## James Everington (Dec 25, 2010)

_Bladerunner_ is pretty different to _Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?_ really. For a starters, no sheep (electric or otherwise).


----------



## Nebula7 (Apr 21, 2011)

"Th3ee" from Ted Dekker. Great book. Terrible movie.


----------



## nmg222 (Sep 14, 2010)

To say 'The Shining' was loosely based on the book would be an overstatement.


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

Going the other way, I loved the movie about Benjamin Button. I know it was based on the short story, but I thought the movie was better than the story.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

Most of the James Bond movies. But that bothers me less than something like "The Bridge on the River Kwai" where the significant difference was the ending.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

_The Running Man_ by Richard Bachman/Stephen King

Betsy


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

nmg222 said:


> To say 'The Shining' was loosely based on the book would be an overstatement.


No kidding. The TV movie was much closer to the book. And it should have been, Stephen King wrote the screenplay and produced the 4 hour movie. 

Mike


----------



## ilamont (Jul 14, 2012)

_Cloudy With A Touch Of Meatballs. _

But both the book and film versions were great. I was expecting to be disappointed with the movie, but it was very well done.


----------



## Tony Richards (Jul 6, 2011)

_I, Robot_ with Will Smith. Well, the _title_ was the same.


----------



## Rook (Sep 6, 2011)

BTackitt said:


> Going the other way, I loved the movie about Benjamin Button. I know it was based on the short story, but I thought the movie was better than the story.


Great point. The book is usually better but certainly not always.


----------



## Tony Richards (Jul 6, 2011)

BTackitt said:


> Going the other way, I loved the movie about Benjamin Button. I know it was based on the short story, but I thought the movie was better than the story.


Short fiction often makes for good movies, since you can _expand_ on the original tale instead of having to compress it down and cut material out. _The Man Who Would be King_, for instance, was originally a Rudyard Kipling short. and _Being There_ was a novella by Jerzy Kosinski.


----------



## Sam Medina (Aug 9, 2012)

Too many to name... offhand, I HATED John Carter of Mars... Lord of the Flies, every single version of Beowulf... let me stop before I go into a nerd rage.


----------



## jeffaaronmiller (Jul 17, 2012)

Watchers by Dean Koontz. A touching little horror story about a super intelligent dog was turned into a lame B-movie starring Corey Haim.


----------



## James Everington (Dec 25, 2010)

Tony Richards said:


> _I, Robot_ with Will Smith. Well, the _title_ was the same.


We have a winner!


----------



## Jonathan C. Gillespie (Aug 9, 2012)

"The Relic", by Douglas Preston and Lincoln Child, was an absolutely astounding, creepy book that featured prominently a southern gentleman / cop named Pendergast -- who they promptly dropped from the film. A major protagonist, gone. just like that. I was disappointed, to say the least.

As part of their contract, the authors were not allowed to discuss their opinions on the film. Not sure if that still holds.


----------



## Rook (Sep 6, 2011)

Are there any books that were BETTER off as movies? I'm asking just to get a sense for what works in movies vs. books.

I think in the final analysis I liked Forrest Gump better as a film. A few others have been named here. Are there any others? Why is it so rare for a movie to improve on a book and so common for it to mess it up?


----------



## chrisstevenson (Aug 10, 2012)

Jurassic Park skewed off the mark quite a bit.

What about I am Legend or the Omega Man. Quite different from the book.

chris


----------



## Cuechick (Oct 28, 2008)

"The Color of Money" written by the great Walter Tevis, is the first thing that came to mind. Being a poolplayer, I'd seen the movie many times and thought it was great. Then I read "The Hustler" and loved it, the movie was close but played up the love story much more than the book did... so then a few years ago I read TCOM and was really amazed at how different it was.

Not even close, the character of Victor, that Tom Cruise plays was not even _in_ the book. I read somewhere that it was Paul Newman's idea to stray so far from the book. I can kind of understand it, as Tevis's 2nd book was much more about Eddie's (Newman's character) inner struggles... and that story may not have been as interesting as a film as it was a book.


----------



## hsuthard (Jan 6, 2010)

When I read the thread title, I immediately thought of Forest Gump. I read the book first and when I saw that Tom Hanks was cast in the leading role, I didn't bother to see the movie.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

jeffaaronmiller said:


> Watchers by Dean Koontz. A touching little horror story about a super intelligent dog was turned into a lame B-movie starring Corey Haim.


I think there have been _four_ movies made from this book. All wretched.

Mike


----------



## Vukovina (Mar 30, 2012)

_Dune_.

(Still gotta love David Lynch, though!)


----------



## jeffaaronmiller (Jul 17, 2012)

What about The Lightning Thief, the first Percy Jackson movie? It strayed so far from the book, it pretty much guaranteed no more movies in the series.


----------



## Sam Medina (Aug 9, 2012)

Yeah, I forgot about_* I am Legend*_. The latest one was horrible... and they just had to stick to the Hollywood rule of 'the black guy dies.' smh


----------



## ColinJ (Jun 13, 2011)

jeffaaronmiller said:


> Watchers by Dean Koontz. A touching little horror story about a super intelligent dog was turned into a lame B-movie starring Corey Haim.


Yeah, that one hurt. A terrific book that could have made a great movie.

The less said about the movie the better.


----------



## JezStrider (Jun 19, 2012)

I am Legend is actually one of my favorite movies.  I cry like a baby every time I watch it.  To avoid spoilers, I won't say which part, but I'm sure anyone who has seen it can guess. 

Bram Stoker's Dracula.  Love the movie.  The one with Gary Oldman, but it took me forever to sludge through the book and it's pretty short.

Even if a movie isn't exactly like the book, I don't mind so long as it's a good attempt.  I just see it as a different interpretation and enjoy seeing how another person envisioned the story.  It's all art.


----------



## Martin OHearn (Feb 9, 2012)

About ninety percent of Philip K. Dick movies (if _A Scanner Darkly _ constitutes ten percent).


----------



## FH (Jul 30, 2012)

All the Jason Bourne books by Robert Ludlum.


----------



## Morgan Curtis (May 15, 2012)

Rook said:


> Are there any books that were BETTER off as movies? I'm asking just to get a sense for what works in movies vs. books.
> 
> I think in the final analysis I liked Forrest Gump better as a film. A few others have been named here. Are there any others? Why is it so rare for a movie to improve on a book and so common for it to mess it up?


I think it's because when you read a book you're right there in the scene. You see everything described, and your imagination fills in the details. You hear, see, and smell whatever your mind tells you is there. Then you see the movie and even if it follows the book closely, nothing looks quite as expected. You're now a spectator rather than being immersed in a character.


----------



## EmilyG (Jan 31, 2010)

> Are there any books that were BETTER off as movies?


The Boy in Striped Pajamas was a much better movie than book. I think because they removed all of Bruno's annoying characteristics that made me wonder by the end of the book if he was mentally handicapped.


----------



## Jan Strnad (May 27, 2010)

Just about every film version of _Huckleberry Finn _ has gone for the nostalgic and sentimental without the scathing satire and social commentary. Talk about throwing out the baby and keeping the bath water....

I'm amazed that every version of _I Am Legend _ has missed the obvious point of the ending, telegraphed by the title.

Do comic books count? _Judge Dredd _ was a real franchise killer. First, let's strip him of his Judgeship, so that Judge...get that...*Judge* Dredd isn't...a judge. Then we'll make every other possible wrong decision from there.


----------



## Tony Richards (Jul 6, 2011)

martinfreddyhansen said:


> All the Jason Bourne books by Robert Ludlum.


Watched the latest Bourne movie -- _Legacy_ -- yesterday. An incomprehensible plot run past your startled gaze at roughly the same speed as an advanced-level video game. Just atrocious!


----------



## balaspa (Dec 27, 2009)

As a Stephen King fan, nothing was more egregious than that adaptation of The Lawnmower Man.  Sheesh...still makes me shiver.


----------



## Tony Richards (Jul 6, 2011)

Why are so many terrible movies made from his tales? _Sleepwalkers_ and _Maximum Overdrive_ were awful. On the other hand, we'll always have _Shawshank_.


----------



## Sean Sweeney (Apr 17, 2010)

How about all books? No movie is like the book.


----------



## Richard Raley (May 23, 2011)

"Rocket Boys"/"October Sky".  Of course a bunch of little things, but they completely removed how awesome Elsie Hickam was.


----------



## Steverino (Jan 5, 2011)

Rook said:


> Are there any books that were BETTER off as movies? I'm asking just to get a sense for what works in movies vs. books...
> 
> Why is it so rare for a movie to improve on a book and so common for it to mess it up?


Both _Jaws_ and _The Shawshank Redemption_ worked better as movies than books/stories. In both movies, the plots were made more dramatically intense, and the main characters more sympathetic.


----------



## raychensmith (Jul 11, 2012)

Vukovina said:


> _Dune_.
> 
> (Still gotta love David Lynch, though!)


Really? I thought the movie was pretty much like the book. Not quite as grand obviously, but the major scenes were similar.

I have to second Watchers. The book was pretty decent (before Dean Koontz developed what Stephen King calls diarrhea of the word processor), but the movie was absolute crap, crap, CRAP!


----------



## Neekeebee (Jan 10, 2009)

_Snow Flower and the Secret Fan_ by Lisa See. Why did they feel the need to throw in that awful present-day storyline that was just annoying?

I just finished _Blood Work_ by Michael Connelly and am getting ready to watch the film, and there is a little voice that is saying "Don't!" But I just cant stop myself!

N


----------



## amygamet (Aug 26, 2012)

Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs.  Such a great children's book, such a horrible movie.  Almost nothing in common at all.


----------



## StephenLivingston (May 10, 2011)

_The Legend of Sleepy Hollow_ movie was nothing like Washington Irving's story.
Best wishes, Stephen Livingston.


----------



## K. A. Jordan (Aug 5, 2010)

Tony Richards said:


> _I, Robot_ with Will Smith. Well, the _title_ was the same.


This was first Movie/Book set I thought of!


----------



## Alle Meine Entchen (Dec 6, 2009)




----------



## Lensman (Aug 28, 2012)

I'm a great fan of the late Andre Norton - if anyone's read and enjoyed her novel, The Beast Master, avoid the movie of the same name like the plague. It goes from a science fiction setting to a bland fantasy - not even the names are the same.


----------



## Gareth K Pengelly (Aug 25, 2012)

Eragon.

They changed HUGE amounts from the book.

In the movie, the Princess (forget her name) wasn't even an ELF!


----------



## vikiana (Oct 5, 2012)

"I, Robot" was my top number one for movies that noting like the book. Well,it has the same title but everything else was completely different! I 'm amazed how much difference the directors can bring into one movie based on a novel or another kind of book. After all if they want to change the story so much they just have to create a brand new movie with no connection to the book. In this case there wouldn't be nasty attacks about the whole this problem.



BTackitt said:


> Going the other way, I loved the movie about Benjamin Button. I know it was based on the short story, but I thought the movie was better than the story.


I'm absolutely agree that the story of Benjamin Button is much more effective ov the movie. The main characters are very talantlive and the movie is a masterpiece itself!



ilamont said:


> _Cloudy With A Touch Of Meatballs. _
> 
> But both the book and film versions were great. I was expecting to be disappointed with the movie, but it was very well done.


i didn't know that there is a book. I'm very interested of reading it!


----------



## Aaron Scott (May 27, 2012)

_The Dunwhich Horror_ - my nickname for the movie is _I Was a Mod Antichrist_.


----------



## M Ramberg (Jun 23, 2011)

Rook said:


> I've always enjoyed the movie _Forrest Gump_, but when I sat down to read the novel (by Winston Groom) I was startled at how little they had in common. I've also experience it the other way, where a book I read and loved gets made into something unrecognizable and disappointing (I'm looking at YOU, _Starship Troopers_!)
> 
> Obviously, books and film are different media and you can do things in one version that you can't (or shouldn't) do in the other, but has anyone else had the experience of "adaptation shock?"


I recall Starship Troopers being much closer to the book than it had any right to be - it had the high school kids all rah-rah to enlist together, the teacher who comes along, and especially the brain bug ending. Even the themes of quasi-fascism and dehumanizing (oh so literally) your enemy were there in the book. Obviously there were a lot differences, but really the plot was pretty much the same.


----------



## DanDillard (Mar 10, 2011)

Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter... Surprisingly good book, surprisingly different movie--strange as the novel and screenplay were written by the same guy... and I'm not sold on Daniel Radcliffe as Ig Perrish in the movie based on Joe Hill's Horns. Don't see it at all.


----------



## balaspa (Dec 27, 2009)

Going back to Lawnmower Many and the person who mentioned Sleepwalkes.  The worst part about Sleepwalkers was that King himself wrote that horrible movie to be made into a movie.  He wrote it for the screen!  I was so disappointed in that movie.


----------



## dkrauss (Oct 13, 2012)

_Disclosure_. The movie was ten times better than the book, which may not be saying much.


----------



## lvhiggins (Aug 1, 2012)

The English Patient, by Michael Ondaatje.  The movie was pretty good -- the book uber-literary in the most pompous and self-conscious way.


----------



## Natasha Holme (May 26, 2012)

Alex Garland's 'The Beach' was amazing. But the movie cut out 95% of the storyline and changed the plot to boot.


----------



## Scott Daniel (Feb 1, 2011)

The Queen of the Damned falls into that category. It was a combination of a couple Anne Rice novels that fell flat on its face. Also, still disappointed that Tom Cruise played Lestat in Interview with a Vampire. Ugh!


----------



## carolineluvs2rt (Mar 31, 2011)

Because Ken Follett novels are long and complex, the movie of EYE OF THE NEEDLE was only about the last three chapters of the book. I understand that the entire book could never have been included in a movie unless it was serialized. The movie I thought most disappointing was SCARLET LETTER. The movie destroyed the book and entirely missed Hawthorne's point.


----------



## projectbk (Apr 12, 2012)

They've yet to do a faithful version of Mansfield Park, aside from the BBC version.  Same with A Little Princess.  The worst has to be Cheaper by the Dozen(2003) by far.  It wasn't even really an adaptation- it just had the same title.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

Since I just finished the unabridged _The Count of Monte Cristo_ (all 1200+ pages of it), I realize that of all the movie/TV versions that I have seen, most of them have been _very_ loose adaptations of the story. Seems like the writers just took the basic idea of a man imprisoned for 14 years, escaping, and wreaking revenge, and then wrote the rest of it on their own. They've even dropped some fairly major characters. Several even missed the whole point of the book. The only one I've seen that comes close is the 1996 version made as a 6-hour miniseries for French television. I guess with 6 hours to play with, you can put all that extra stuff in there.

The last one, made in 2002, was one of the worst offenders IMHO. It was a good costume drama with a pretty good cast. Then they went crazy and changed the parentage of one essential character negating much of the story line, and tacked a bogus "happy" ending on it.

Mike


----------



## Indy (Jun 7, 2010)

I'll agree with the late adaptation of The Count of Monte Cristo, because it happens to be my favorite book.  What about all the disney flicks, especially The Hunchback of Notre Dame?!  I was livid when we spent money on that thing.  And perhaps worse than either of those two was Stardust.  In no possible universe will I believe Neil Gaiman wrote that whilst picturing Robert DeNiro in drag.  They could have done that to many other movies and I would have thought it was funny, but not Stardust.


----------



## Rachel Schurig (Apr 9, 2011)

projectbk said:


> They've yet to do a faithful version of Mansfield Park, aside from the BBC version. Same with A Little Princess. The worst has to be Cheaper by the Dozen(2003) by far. It wasn't even really an adaptation- it just had the same title.


Definitely agree about A Little Princess, which is one of my favorite books.

I have issues with the CBC adaptations of the Anne of Green Gables books. They combine several books in each of the two movies, so obviously things get changed/cut. The first one works, the second one (Anne of Avonlea) I _hate_. Really, really hate.


----------

