PDA

View Full Version : movies better than the book?


Wildbilld
11-16-2002, 09:47 PM
What comes to mind? :)

Reigh Kaufman
11-17-2002, 02:05 PM
Being There - movie was far better than the book.

The Deer Hunter - book was amazing, movie more so.

Reigh Kaufman
11-17-2002, 02:13 PM
Being There - movie was far better than the book.

The Deer Hunter - book was amazing, movie more so.

Moviefan1234
11-17-2002, 07:40 PM
In my opinion most movies are better than the books. Guess I'm a visual person. That and I'm partial to cinema. :)

Congerking
11-18-2002, 01:14 PM
I do not believe that a movie can be better than a book. but one that comes to mind that is as good as the book would be JURASSIC PARK.

BoyScoutKevin
11-22-2002, 06:36 PM
Lair of the White Worm" comes to mind. Ever read the book? Actually, I won $30.00 for a 200 word essay as to why the movie version by Ken Russell was better than the book version by Bram Stoker. Enjoy!

Annie Hall
11-22-2002, 11:21 PM
I know I am going to get harassed for this, but I believe that the LOTR:FOTR movie was better than the book. The best way of describing it is in terms of the HP book/movie

The first Harry Potter book is simple, but incredible. The movie over-simplified itself, stretching itself thin.

The LOTR book is very very complicated, and often incredibly dry. The movie version (bear with me people) is like the Harry Potter book, it is simpler but captivating, intelligent and has many levels.

Also, it has Ian McKellen and Christopher Lee....who just make life worth living.

Wildbilld
11-23-2002, 10:37 AM
I actually heard that if JRR TTolkien was alive he would reject the idea of them being made into a movie, even if they knew it would be this big. :)

Annie Hall
11-23-2002, 10:58 AM
Originally posted by Wildbilld
I actually heard that if JRR TTolkien was alive he would reject the idea of them being made into a movie, even if they knew it would be this big. :)

That really is quite a shame, because at least the first movie was quite incredible, and really brought a wider audience to the series. Had Peter Jackson not done such an incredible job, I would understand JRR's feelings, but one must wonder if he had seen the final cut of the first movie, would Tolkien have changed his mind?

Mick
11-25-2002, 06:49 PM
Originally posted by Wildbilld
I actually heard that if JRR TTolkien was alive he would reject the idea of them being made into a movie, even if they knew it would be this big. :)

What an odd thing to say............


I have to agree about LOTR, while the movie does drag on a bit, I became InCrEdIbLy bored after 5 days solid reading about Frodo and his little companions eating Lembas (sp?) and sleeping/drinking/getting high... no need at all for the book to be so damn long. Pity Jackson's so scared of all the LOTR geeks, or he could've made 3 really good movies, instead of 3 rather boring movies with some decent elements.

the night watchman
12-06-2002, 01:29 AM
"The Howling" by Gary Brandner - an awful novel by an awful novelist.

I agree that "Jurassic Park" and "The Lost World" were better movies than books.

Dare I add King's "Dolores Claiborne" to the list?

Master_Shake
12-07-2002, 02:09 AM
The Godfather. good book but Great movie

bankholdup
12-11-2002, 03:35 PM
The Shining. The ending was nothing compared to the Kubrick version. Although the hedge animals would have been neat to see.

bob
12-15-2002, 02:09 PM
I haven't seen Rules of Attraction, but it must be better than the book, which was one of the worst books I've ever read.

wrathchild
12-28-2002, 12:46 AM
I quess it all depends on if you lie reading better than movies or vice/versa. but one Book that comes to mind that was better was" Dont say a word" that movie sucked the book was great

Asokan
01-06-2003, 09:37 AM
The Godfather. good book but Great movie

I second that.

AxeDamn
01-07-2003, 11:43 AM
I disagree about JP and TLW...

Spielberg could have made much better movies if they'd been based perfeclt around the book. There's not a lot of difference between the first one (except Muldoon kicking Raptor arse with a rocket launcher), but the second film (IMHO) lacked a lot of the intrigue and intelligence of the bok.

On the other hand, I'll still say I think the book of JP is better than the book of TLW anyway!

the night watchman
01-07-2003, 04:03 PM
I don't particularly care for Crichton's writing, thusly, the JP movies were much more enjoyable than the books for me. I even liked JP III. :eek:

Mad Maggot
01-10-2003, 12:28 PM
only The Silence Of The Lambs (seems like I'm repeating this title in the third thread in a row).