# Movie Adaptations



## TheSeagull (Oct 25, 2009)

Right now I'm reading Up in the Air by Walter Kirn and it's great. It made me think and I'm interested, do you read the book before you watch the film? If you didn't know that a film you enjoyed was based on a book would you then read the book? I usually try to read the book first, there's still a few movies that I have seen where I haven't read the source material though, Lord of the Rings being the most embarrassing. Is there a movie that you think is better than the source material?


----------



## Maxx (Feb 24, 2009)

I only can think of one movie that I liked better than the book:

Sophie's Choice

I haven't read The Godfather, but I have seen the movie, I have heard that many think the movie is much better than the book.


----------



## Meemo (Oct 27, 2008)

TheSeagull said:


> Is there a movie that you think is better than the source material?


The only time I've liked a movie better than the book is "The Bridges of Madison County". Didn't care for the book, didn't get what the hype was about, the movie was much better.


----------



## Digital Tempest (Dec 17, 2009)

Lord of the Rings. I could barely make it through books without snoozing in high school. Tried again because I thought I was being biased because it was a school assignment. Still had a hard time being interested in the books. The movies are excellent, though. I love them.


----------



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

Digital Tempest said:


> Lord of the Rings. I could barely make it through books without snoozing in high school. Tried again because I thought I was being biased because it was a school assignment. Still had a hard time being interested in the books. The movies are excellent, though. I love them.


Same here. Liked the movies, didn't care for the books.

I thought _The Da Vinci Code_ was a more entertaining as a movie than a book, but that's not saying much. 

I also liked _The Bourne Identity_ better as a movie, possibly because they cut about half of it.

Mike


----------



## Dana (Dec 4, 2009)

Lately, I have been reading the books before going and it has been interesting.  I do feel like it has added to my theater experience instead of ruining the "surprise."

The Lovely Bones was WAY better in the book form.  They just changed too many important details in the movie...  although some of the things they left out of the movie were excellent choices.  

Dear John was also better in book form.......  but not THAT many key elements changed between book and movie.

After seeing Blind Side, I loved it so much, I would be interested in reading the book.........  but usually, if I see a film before reading the book, I keep meaning to read the book, but other choices pop up and.........  never get around to it.

I also read Nights in Rodanthe, but didn't make it to the theater, so will have to watch that one on DVD.  It's been quite a while since I read the book, so I probably won't notice the differences between the two much......

I have a lot of catching up to do on the Harry Potter series, but until they're Kindle-ized, that will be pushed to the back burner too.


----------



## CJ West (Feb 24, 2010)

Bourne Identity is one movie I've liked better than the book, but in most cases there is a lot more "story" in the print version. I'm going through this process now with one of my books and learned quite a bit about the limitations of film as a medium and the time constraints placed on screenwriters. I'd love to chat about this here if anyone is interested. In a nutshell, it is really difficult to deliver a complex plot on film. The main vehicles for delivering information are dialog and pictures. Conveying abstract ideas and complex information is much easier when you have easy access to a character's thoughts. 

All in all, I still prefer explosions and car chases on film and psychological elements in books.

CJ


----------



## WilliamM (Feb 10, 2009)

i loved the Bourne books  but thought the movies were just ok. I pictured Jason Bourne as quite a bit older and I personally dislike when they take a book and use it in name and character only in the film and just totally re-write the story which i felt they did with the Bourne books. 
Two perfect examples are  Dune and The Shining. Everyone says Dune is unfilmable but if they put the time, money , and length into it  like they did with the Lord Of The Rings I think it would be very filmable. We shall see what comes of the one in the works now


----------



## shadow2683 (Feb 17, 2010)

easily the last of the mohicans


----------



## WilliamM (Feb 10, 2009)

Digital Tempest said:


> Lord of the Rings. I could barely make it through books without snoozing in high school. Tried again because I thought I was being biased because it was a school assignment. Still had a hard time being interested in the books. The movies are excellent, though. I love them.


i sletp through the movies as well


----------



## mistyd107 (May 22, 2009)

I tend to enjoy the books a lot more than the movies.  The only two movies that came close to being as good as the print versions IMO were The Notebook and The Green Mile.  Both of which I LOVE.  I usually read books first


----------



## DYB (Aug 8, 2009)

Fuzzy Dunlop said:


> iEveryone says Dune is unfilmable but if they put the time, money , and length into it like they did with the Lord Of The Rings I think it would be very filmable. We shall see what comes of the one in the works now


The SciFi Channel did put in the money and the length into it and made an excellent adaptation a number of years back with Alec Newman as Paul.


----------



## Sparkplug (Feb 13, 2009)

I thought the movie-version of _Forrest Gump_ was better than the book. I also enjoyed watching _The Notebook_, a lot more than I did reading the book -- but that would probably have more to due with Ryan Gossling and James Marsden.


----------



## Magenta (Jun 6, 2009)

I do try to read the book first if I know it exists.  My experience with seeing the movie first and reading the book after has varied.... I saw Night Watch and Day Watch first and then read the books.  The movies kind of mix up the books.  I watched the first season of Dexter first and then bought the books... I was very disappointed with the books.  I thought the show was better.  

Now, once you've read the book, you an never see the movie unbiased.  You have your own mental picture to begin with.  Then, you have to accept the director's and screen writers interpretation ... sometimes that is no easy to do.


----------



## Blanche (Jan 4, 2010)

I loved Larry McMurtry's "Lonesome Dove."  I loved it from the opening lines when it discussed the making of the "Hat Creek Cattle Company" sign (We don't rent pigs). I was anxious when I heard about the movie and ready to be disappointed.  What a pleasant surprise!  It was the first movie I ever saw based upon a book that truly did the book justice.  I fell in love with the characters all over again and cried when Gus died just as I did in the book.  I have the book and the movie both side-by-side in my bookcase and re-read and re-watch one or the other nearly every winter.


----------



## Meemo (Oct 27, 2008)

Blanche said:


> I loved Larry McMurtry's "Lonesome Dove." I loved it from the opening lines when it discussed the making of the "Hat Creek Cattle Company" sign (We don't rent pigs). I was anxious when I heard about the movie and ready to be disappointed. What a pleasant surprise! It was the first movie I ever saw based upon a book that truly did the book justice. I fell in love with the characters all over again and cried when Gus died just as I did in the book. I have the book and the movie both side-by-side in my bookcase and re-read and re-watch one or the other nearly every winter.


I think the miniseries of Lonesome Dove followed the book more closely than almost any I've seen. They still had to leave out certain things, but a miniseries should always be a better interpretation than a feature movie, because they have more time to get it "right". I too loved, loved both the book (one of those books that I just didn't want to end - and I still don't know what possessed me to pick it up at the library, I'd never heard of it back in 1986 or so) - cried at several parts (I always dread the part


Spoiler



where Deets dies


, it just breaks my heart every time). One of the best interpretations of a book ever - so well cast, too. I stop and watch every time I catch it on TV, even though I have the DVD.


----------



## DYB (Aug 8, 2009)

"Lonesome Dove" is one of those books I've been meaning to read, but it's not available on Kindle!


----------



## Neekeebee (Jan 10, 2009)

Jodi Picoult's _My Sister's Keeper_ is one of my favorite books. I liked the movie as well, but the storyline was changed in a significant way.

I'm also looking forward to seeing what they do with _Formosa Betrayed_, which is coming out this weekend. George Kerr's book by the same title was the most eye-opening book I read while in college. I've heard that the film is not based on the book, but made in the same spirit and about a similar event later in history. Trying to decide whether to re-read the DTB or pull the free online PDF file for conversion to my Kindle.

N 

P.S. Yup, I have the DTB of _Lonesome Dove_ that I keep meaning to read too!


----------



## WilliamM (Feb 10, 2009)

DYB said:


> The SciFi Channel did put in the money and the length into it and made an excellent adaptation a number of years back with Alec Newman as Paul.


i think the definitive version of Dune has yet to be made....


----------



## BoomerSoonerOKU (Nov 22, 2009)

I'd have to call Mash a close tie. I thoroughly enjoyed both (not to mention the tv series as well). The book is great, and if you are looking for a quick read I'd definitely recommend it. If you haven't seen the movie do yourself a favor and put it on your list. I actually did read the book first but wasn't disappointed at all when watching the movie.


----------



## LindaW (Jan 14, 2009)

shadow2683 said:


> easily the last of the mohicans


Yes!! I saw the movie when it first came out - so I thought I'd give the book a try. OMG - I can't get through the first couple of chapters. I've tried 4 times, but I haven't given up. A co-worker and I have a pact to read it some time in April and to finish it once and for all. We're hoping that misery will love company enough to keep us going!


----------



## Magenta (Jun 6, 2009)

Fuzzy Dunlop said:


> i think the definitive version of Dune has yet to be made....


Well, maybe it will be finally: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1160419/

They are making it again for a 2010 release.


----------



## Taborcarn (Dec 15, 2009)

I definitely have to agree with _The Godfather_ for movies and _Dexter_ as far as TV shows being better than the source books.


----------



## WilliamM (Feb 10, 2009)

Magenta said:


> Well, maybe it will be finally: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1160419/
> 
> They are making it again for a 2010 release.


yep i mentioned that in my original post


----------



## Lynnette Bonner (Feb 12, 2010)

In addition to some movies mentioned here (The Last of the Mohicans, for sure) I liked The Princess Bride better as a movie than the book. To me, the humor came through so much better in the movie.


----------



## Labrynth (Dec 31, 2009)

I usually end up reading the book first and have found I almost always like the books more than any movie.  there seem to be very few adaptations that work well.  The Green Mile was well done but I was a bit peeved they skipped a few, IMO, important items in it.  I still get teary eyed when I think about what they did to Watchers, which is still my fav book of all time.

The Dead Zone series was way better than the book IMO.  I read the book once I got interested in the series and watched the movie both and was disappointed in both.  Many of the elements that appealed to me in the series where very absent in the book itself.


----------



## suicidepact (May 17, 2009)

I try to read the book first if it looks like it'll be the type of movie I like and I know it's a book first.


----------



## summerteeth (Dec 23, 2009)

Sparkplug said:


> I thought the movie-version of _Forrest Gump_ was better than the book. I also enjoyed watching _The Notebook_, a lot more than I did reading the book -- but that would probably have more to due with Ryan Gossling and James Marsden.


My thoughts exactly! I didn't like the book too much -- the movie was better. Also, I really liked the book Choke, but the movie was kind of unnecessary. Same with Running With Scissors.

I usually like the book more so than the movie, though. For example, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest - the movie was good, but the book was phenomenal. Also, To Kill a Mockingbird - both great, but the book is better.


----------



## Magenta (Jun 6, 2009)

summerteeth said:


> ...... Also, To Kill a Mockingbird - both great, but the book is better.


Wow, this jumped out to me... To Kill a Mockingbird.... in my eyes, is a great example of equal excellence. I can read the book and watch the movie over and over again and be totally enthralled by each. If I were offered a million dollars, I couldn't say one or the other was better.

Sigh....such a wonderful story. Simply wonderful.


----------

