Yes, we get it, you read books. Big Woop.
Has the book ever not been better?
Has anyone ever come out of a movie and gone “Wow that was so much better than the book!”
The Book Was Better
– December 4, 2007
-
Recent Posts
Tags
360 apartment blog Botch bugs C# car christmas code Coding crysis derma engine ep2 Facewound forum Forums gamedev gamemodes games garrysmod gmod iphone life list mapping movies moving office orange box patch patches php portal programming shader spawnmenu stuff tf2 update valve walsall websites xbox youtube
No, I haven’t, I think it’s because I like imagining the settings and voices and other things in a book than having up on a screen infront of me.
People that haven’t read the books usually say that the film is better.
Yeah its because inevitably the film isn’t going to be exactly how you pictured it in your head – therefore making it ‘wrong’.
I have to agree that the book is always better than the film though (okay I’m not very well read and am basing this purely on harry potter and the Da Vinci code :P)
I don’t think that happens very often, but there are quite a few movies which were based on books, but only the movies really struck a chord with an audience and are remembered today.
Die Hard.
Dr. Strangelove.
First Blood.
4th Harry potter was better than the book.
As a side note, I Robot was a fucking pile of shit compared to the book.
well, my sister said the 1st harry potter movie was better than the book.
also about 1/2 the people i know who’ve read the LOTR trilogy thought the movies were better.
The unimaginative are the ones who say the films are better.
Film makers will never truly make a film better than a book whilst we still have an imagination. Make more crappy films until they’re dissolved to a mushy pile of slag!
lol this is about as random as last post… you must be really tired.
films usually leave out key details that turn them into crap if you have read the book
you sit there just thinking “oh no that’s wrong you idiot wtf u doin” for the whole movie instead of enjoying it
American Psycho the movie was MUCH better than the book.
One might be Jurassic Park, the book lacks the ablity to make you crap your pants.
I’m sure there’s a few good movies based on bad books.
The problem is, if you read the book then watch the movie, it’s going to be different than what you imagined, and so wrong. If you watch the movie then read the book, it’s going to be different than what you watched, and so wrong.
Actually, if you’ve ever read “The Haunting of Hill House” by Shirley Jackson, and then watched the movie “The Haunting” (1963), you’ll probably think that the movie was better than the book. That’s all I’m saying.
I can only guess that you’ve never encountered hardcore tolkien purists before.
huh
If you ever watched a Disney film they often make a comic book that sucks compared to the movie (Aladdin!)
-Required
Most obvious example of the movie being better than the book is Kubrick’s The Shining. Stephen King hated that version and denounced it publicly. Jealous?
Pauls example is the only one I can think of; anything else, we already have our minds set to think something else, so no matter what they do they’ll screw it up for you somehow.
Anything by Michael Crichton really, he has really good ideas but can’t turn them into anything good, whilst most movies of his books are really good.
Blade Runner, obviously. The book was mind-numbingly bad; the movie is a classic.
I was about to say! “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep” is a crap book imo but Blade Runner is a fucking awesome film.
I’d imagine this was bought about by The Golden Compass? I’m looking forward to it but I’ve got no doubt it won’t do the books justice. Especially now they’ve gone and toned down the anti-catholic/religion message.
The Shawshank Redemption
Actually I believe that the movie The Godfather was better than the book.
The book of this post was better.
The book is always better, but that doesn’t always mean the movie is bad.
Case in point, Lord of the Rings. Good book, better than the movie, but the movie still rocks hard.
What I really have a problem with is when a movie is reportedly “based on a book” with the same name and everything, but then they completely change everything! If you’re going to do that, why not just leave out the whole “based on” bit?
I, Robot. Excellent book. What the fuck was the movie about? The only similarity it held with the book was Asimov’s three laws which are in practically everyone one of his books. So why bother naming it I, Robot?
I’m really worried about the Golden Compass. That it’s being produced (I think) by the same people as LotR is somewhat reassuring… but it’s got plenty of possibility to fuck up.
To your answer, yes, there are some movies better than their books.
I think it’s basically inevitable that a movie will be worse than the book it is based on. Some are worse than others, though.
Twice that I can remember;
Kubrick’s version of “The Shining” and “Fight Club” I enjoyed more than the books.
Yeah, when I saw Lord of the rings.
Fucking hate those books.
Well, A Clockwork Orange was exactly the same as the book.
Oh, Secret Window kicked the book’s ass.
MIIB
Read it. Hate it. It sounds like they asked a random NYC cab driver to write it.
I guess it depends on which you do first – The Reading or the Watching.
Some say that the Reading is much better because ‘You are gaining a better imagination and insight to the story’. Frankly, I really don’t care about that.
Some also say that ‘Books contain more in the story, Movies leave it out’. Well kiddies, that’s because books go for A LONG TIME! Movies these days go for long enough.
If I read a book, I read it.
Sure I develop an imagination, but I really don’t care to think ‘Wow, the book was so much better’
I found the Hitchhikers Guide movie quite good, different than the books and radio play, but then again Douglas Adams always changed his universe to fit the medium
It’s all just statistics. Only the very best books, true masterpieces, get turned into movies, because there are too many books to make a movie out of all of them. However, movies are evenly distributed again. Let’s say 1% of books is a masterpiece and 1% of movies is a masterpiece. That 1% books is the part of books that gets turned into movies. Out of these movies, 99% are not masterpieces, i.e. they suck compared to the book. The one percent of movies from books that is as good as the book is the part that gets told here in the comments.
The main reason half of all who’ve read the LOTR books say the movies were better is because the books are tedious
If you read a crappy book, why would you want to see a movie about it?
Thus, the book is always better.
Its a stupid comparison! A movie which is based on a book is a different kind of thing than the book. Its another version of the story, the way the director sees it, and adapted to another medium. Storytelling in movies is completely different from storytelling in books.
You can judge how well the filmmakers captured the spirit of the story, and how good the movie is, but its nonsense to make a direct comparison of the book and the movie.
For example: I both like LOTR books AND Peter Jacksons Version of it.
Oh, and you didnt mention the other direction: There are many crappy books about a movie.. i have a very strange starwars book for example…
I preferred Return of the Jedi, the movie over Return of the Jedi sticker album….but only slightly.
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. Awesome book, awesome film. I read the book first then saw the film about 7 times, I’m now reading the book again and I find it more enjoyable this time than I did the first time.
Strange that, but I think it might be because I understand that style of writing more now than I did before.
Garry is reflecting on the stupidity of mankind in its social behaviour.
Jurassic Park. I read the book. Understood only half what was going on.
The movie was waaaaaaaay better :P
Moral of the story: SHOCK YOUR PARENTS! READ A BOOK!
I laugh Joerdgs.
The movie was better because you didn’t understand the book? Pathetic.
I liked the lotr film better them the book
the problem is, movies are made to appeal to the masses, whilst books are to tell a story.
for a start, i have both read and seen Jurassic Park.
the endings are completely different in each version, and the main reason they changed that was to leave space for a sequel.
Northen Lights/Golden Compass
there is a lot of scope to fuck up the story. will they get Daemons right? the alethometer? the whole thing about the church in that world being evil? Dust? is Bolvanger in there?
The book I just read was far more enjoyable than reading this post.
Books are lame, Spoken word is the way to go.
The Spoken Word of The Odyssey was 100x better than the book.
Watching The DaVinci Code is better than reading the book because they’re both traumatically horrid, but the movie is shorter.
On a related note, I read ‘Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH’ a few days ago, and then saw the movie, and now I want to punch Don Bluth in the mouth.
Harry Potter? Yes I like Harry Potter, get over it- Millions of people like Harry Potter.
The book in my opinion was a lot better because it would narrate what the main character(Harry) was thinking, they didn’t do that in movie but watching the movie is still fun.
btw: the game “garrys mod” is waaaay better than his stupid blog :D
This is a weird post again.
Weird post, lots of content.
lol.
What.
I’m not big on books the only thing i read is web pages
@Killuah
I read the books years ago (when I was about 12 years old) and English is not my native language :P
But the Jurassic Park was better as a movie than as a book.
Oh
What you see first is the better.
hell No, I haven’t thought the movie was better. well all but the AVP movie, only because the only AVP book I could find at the time, took place in the wrong time pireod.
@22: Yeah im guessing garry is pissed at what Dark Materials fans have spouted at him. Ive read that trilogy, and im 99% certain whoever is directing it can’t make it as good as the book. With a book, you can deliver and refine a message more easily…with a film, the audience want all the best bits like the explosions and special effects described in the book, they dont want all the mind-numbing dialogue story telling you get in a typical book. However, im dissapointed to hear theyre toning down the religious message, which is a massive part of the whole point of the books… (Basically, that the church are a bunch of control-freak baddies… who kill people to get what they want… SHOCK HORROR!)
Regardless, im looking forward to the film anyway.
I look at a movie like, that’s the idea of hundreds of people’s imaginations and ideas of what they think it should look like. Where as a book is just your ideas and imaginations.
The LOTR film series were better than the books.
The book leave more to the imagination. but yeah, lord of the rings and probably matrix would be ones that were better as movies
There was one, I attempted to read the novel “Children of Men” and was unsuccesful.
Don’t get me wrong, I read frequently and in large quantities but the book was simply flat.
The movie “Children of Men” was exceptional in my opnion, but in all honesty was only loosely based on the novel.
So there you have it what I have just written is next to pointless :D
Lord of The Rings owned the book.
I discovered long ago that if you first read the book the movie seems worse, if you first saw the movie the book seems worse.
So my policy is to decide in advance, movie or book, and then not do the other.
You gotta be brutal in these things.
I preferred Fight Club the movie to the book. The writing style got pretty annoying pretty quick, but it suited a film.
Also the movie has a better ending.
Sadly, no… I guess it’s because we all picture something different in our minds as we read the book. Then the people who decide to make the movie, hire a bullshit director who never read the book in the first place. In a drunken rage, he casts the movie with Norwegian midgets.
The ending of Fight Club movie version was ridiculous.
Also, I liked Shawshank Redemtion and Green mile probably equally to the books if not a little so more becuase of the solid casting and great direction
Children of Men movie was better than the book. The book sucked, the film was amazing.
The Green Mile was a terrible series of books, but the movie was wonderful.
Last of the Mohicans = watch the movie and dont read the book.