• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

has there been any movie that was......

Fight Club - Chuck Palahniuk, the book is good but it is one of the rare occasions where the film is better than the book.
 
I have to disagree, HBinjection. I think the movie lacks the depth of the book. It didn't address the relationships that the books does. To me, the book is all about relationships and how alcohol addiction affects those relationships. Also, the mother character in the movie is 2 dimentional. There is more to her then what is portrayed in the movie. Even the horror aspect was flat to me.

On the other hand, Jack Nicholson was great as Jack, even though that's who I would have pictured.
 
I vaguely remember thinking that the movie "Field of Dreams" was better than the book "Shoeless Joe." It might have been the presence of Kevin Costner, though. It's actually one of my favorite movies of all time.

I can think of a few movies that, while not better than the books, made me appreciative of the changes the filmmakers made to adapt the book for screen.

I also loved the book "The Shining" but didn't care for the movie.
 
Some of the films let me down after I read books. A couple of years, I read 'Choclat' by Julie Harris. I looked forward to this film and I found out that I am not looking for. Really disppointed. I always read book to use my imagination.
I can't think other else of good films from the book.
 
Star Wars. All of them, for what its worth. Its one thing to read about a--insert special effect-- and quite another to see it flashing through someone's body, arm, spaceship, etc.
 
ok i star wars was good exacmple but imagination can only go so far when it comes to imagining spaceships and futre technology. all i know is that if a movie is better at repesenting imagination than we can produce ourselves then it would be better. am i right?:cool:
 
Well Dawn,

You are wrong.

The film, The Shining, is better than the novel.

I agree that the book includes more information about the characters and their feelings, but I don't think Stephen King was in top form in the Shining.

I don't think the book was very scary. I think the movie was terrifying.

The film distilled the themes in the book. They are presented in a simpler, but, IMO, more effective form.

Kubrick is a master photographer. He can tell a story with images better than King can with words.

I should say that my tastes in art tend toward the cryptic and obscure. I don't like it when the artist gives too much away.


ET
 
I must humbly disagree, HBinjection. I thought the book was much scarier than the film. I think it distilled the themes in the book too much. So of which was pushed to the background. I agree the images were fantastic. I especially liked when Danny (that is the child name, isn't it?) was riding the Big Wheel throughout The Lookout. I can still remember the sound of the wheels as it moved from hard flooring to carpet. It was quite effective. Still, on the whole, I think the book was much more frightening. I think Stephen King has had bad luck with his book-to-screen attempts.
 
Yeah, HB, but that was Kubrick. In general I think that directors are severly limited by their medium. A few notable exceptions there are, indeed, but very few. Its hard to beat the canvas of the mind.

And you're right Dawn, King has horrible luck with movies. They seem to all be disapointing. I guess the Shining was the only one that was as horrifying as he thought it should be.
 
Bridges Of Madison County

Call me a sentimental old softie ("you're a sentimental old softie" he hears them shout :) ) but I thought that The Bridges Of Madison County, Directed by Clint Eastwood as well as starring him with Meryl Streep, was a very good film from a fairly average book.
On the strength of BoMC I then read another of Robert James Waller's novels (Slow Waltz In Cedar Bend) which was even more 'average' than BoMC and I didn't finish it :(

Dave B.
 
Same here, Dave. I also picked up Slow Waltz In Cedar Bend because of the film. I was sorely disappointed.
 
To Kill a Mockingbird is a very good film. The book is better but the film gives it a good run for its money.

I also think the TV series of Das Boot captures the mood of the book superbly. Again the book has the edge over the film but only just.
 
Pilgrim, do you know if the TV series of Das Boot is the same as the movie version - i.e. the original movie, but split up into TV-sized chunks? Or is it something completely different, made specifically for TV?

'Cause now you've got me interested in finding the book and looking for the TV series :D

As I mentioned in another thread, the movie is excellent!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top