Movies that are better than the book - Page 2

[KYCat]

3rds on Mary Poppins. Of course I could do the movie by heart and just read it to the boys last summer, but in the book, I didn't like her very much. Of course, Julie Andrews could probably make you like Hitler! (At least if he sang )) I've never read Princess Bride, but I LOVE the movie so I can't imagine that the book would surpass the movie. My theory has always been that if you see the movie first, the movie stands a chance because you're not thinking of all that you're missing but involving yourself in the story at hand. If you've read the book first, the movie is always a tough sell.

It's not better, but To Kill a Mockingbird is fabulous in both formats. )

[HappilyEvrAfter]

Ugh. The Wizard of Oz. Maybe cause I'm biased from growing up with the movie, but I just couldn't go back and get through the book.

Wuthering Heights. The movie came across with the dark feeling I think the book should have had...the book was just creepy and disjointed for me...and not because of the writing style, I like books of that era very much.

[Caneel]

Originally Posted by BookGoddess

The English Patient

I love the film. The book is poetic but it's so sparse. The author is a family friend but I love the film better. :

OMG yes! Before I openned this thread, it was the first movie that popped into my mind.

The first time I saw the movie, I didn't get what all the hype was about. I watched it some time later and then I "got it"

I had to sort of force myself to finish the book.

[AuntNi]

Originally Posted by Smokering

Bridget Jones' Diary is way better than the movie! I read the book, saw the movie and was like "Why is this popular?" The book (and the original column) is witty and well-plotted. The movie is Renee Zellweger being amusingly fat - which isn't that funny and also entirely misses the point of the book, which is that she obsesses about her weight despite not being fat. And then there's the sequel, which I think is even better (book) and worse (movie). I really do not get the movie hype. What am I missing?

Colin Firth. Enough said. : I agree with you that the book was better than the movie, but the whole Colin Firth/Mr. Darcy casting was so awesome that, to me, it made up for any of the movie's shortcomings. Although, I still don't understand why, with all the talented actresses in Britain, they had to cast an extremely petite American as Bridget.

Another movie I enjoyed more than the book: Revolutionary Road.

And I also liked the movie Gone Baby Gone better than the book. I still didn't agree with the choice that Patrick made at the end, but at least in the movie, I understood why he made it.

[greeny]

I didn't even know Mary Poppins was a book!

[Monarchgrrl]

I agree with The Shawshank Redemption. LOVE the movie! I couldn't get through the book. Just too graphic for me.

I disagree w/ Bridget Jones' Diary. The book was hilarious and better than the movie.

Don't hate me, but The Secret Life of Bees. For some reason I just couldn't get into the book. I read about half. I love all her other stuff, though. I loved the movie!

Wicked. Not technically a movie (yet?) but the book is sooooo much better than the musical. And I even loved the musical. I just REALLY loved the book.

[vbactivist]

Originally Posted by greeny

I didn't even know Mary Poppins was a book!

I agree with pp - the book is pretty awful, and I happen to LOVE classic children's lit - hardly ever read anything printed after 1970. But that book just wasn't very good at all - and teh movie is one of my all time favorites.

[Folda]

I didn't even realize some of the classics were books as well. I guess the fact that we saw them as a movie and they took a special place in our hearts overrides the book part. So many modern movies fail to live up to the book though

[Smokering]

I remember really liking one chapter of Mary Poppins (it's several books, actually: haven't read them all). It was a chapter about how the baby (babies?) could talk to the sparrow on the windowsill, and it warned them that soon they'd grow up and wouldn't be able to understand birdsong anymore. And the baby was adamant that it would, but a few days later it had lost the ability and the sparrow was sort of sadly philosophical about it... Something like that, I read it a long time ago. But it was really well written, and I'm a sucker for the lost youth theme (Peter Pan makes me cry buckets), so I like the books for the sake of that one poignant chapter.

But yeah, I do remember Mary being very harsh and... odd... in the books. And wasn't there one plot about someone going to the moon, or... something? Man, it has been a while!

I LOVE the Princess Bride book. I love the movie more, because I saw it first and the actors are phenomenal (plus it's purer and less cynical), but the book is hilarious. I got such a kick out of people telling me they wanted to read the unabridged version.

[MysteryMama]

Interview with the vampire for sure!

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. I like the book a lot, but I think the movie is even better. Same with Trainspotting.

[Teenytoona]

Originally Posted by Rico'sAlice

Forrest Gump.
The book is weird. Forrest is kind of a perv. And there are some events that are even more ridiculous and totally unbelievable compared to the ones they used in the movie. Plus you don't have the soundtrack or score.

OMG this is my all time biggest "don't even bother with the book" recommendation. Not only is Forrest a perv, so is everyone else. That whole business with the monkey and the moon landing?!? WTH? I read that before I saw the movie, and was just wondering, WTF would anyone watch that movie for. Movie was MUCH more endearing, MUCH better. I wonder how the screenplay writers ever read that book and turned the movie into what it was.

[New]

2001: A Space Odyssey

[New]

And Clockwork Orange

[MysteryMama]

Originally Posted by New

And Clockwork Orange

YES!!!! I can't believe I didn't put this one down. I think my mind tried to forget that I ever attempted to read it.

[Jessy1019]

Beaches.

The book wasn't bad, but the movie was much better. Changing Bertie's name to Hilary made a huge difference

[Traci mom23boys]

The only movie that I have ever loved more than the book was *Chocolat*.
The book just wasn't that good and the movie is one of my favorites.

[tinybutterfly]

Practical Magic. The book was good, but the movie was...charming.

Blood and Chocolate. The books was good, but since I saw the movie first that probably influenced the way I felt about it. They were VERY different. Most people prefer the book.

[zinemama]

Originally Posted by ChocolateNummies

I felt this way about Mary Poppins. I mean I know the movie was a musical and they tend to be syrupy and upbeat but I really disliked the book. I read it to my daughter a year or two ago and found it so dark. I couldn't find anything likable about MP and couldn't understand why the kids liked her so. I mean, she was magical and all in the book but she also came across to me as more unkind than lovingly firm.

I cannot disagree more strenuously. The books are strange and magical and mysterious. Mary Poppins is like a goddess come down to earth. There is such a weird mix of pagan/fairytales/history/ all kinds of stuff in all those books. The sense of mystery and whimsy and the power of nature is so strong in them. The whole part with the babies being able to understand the language of the birds and the wind...all that stuff.

How anyone could prefer the sugary, silly inanity of the movie to those books completely eludes me. The way they turned poor Mrs. Banks into a suffragette (and poked fun of her while doing so) and made Mary Poppins all nicey-nice. Ick! Yes, in the book she was stern and contrarian. But those kids adored her. And why not? Who wouldn't adore someone who took them on all those mysterious adventures?

[zipworth]

Originally Posted by zinemama

I cannot disagree more strenuously. The books are strange and magical and mysterious. Mary Poppins is like a goddess come down to earth. There is such a weird mix of pagan/fairytales/history/ all kinds of stuff in all those books. The sense of mystery and whimsy and the power of nature is so strong in them. The whole part with the babies being able to understand the language of the birds and the wind...all that stuff.

How anyone could prefer the sugary, silly inanity of the movie to those books completely eludes me. The way they turned poor Mrs. Banks into a suffragette (and poked fun of her while doing so) and made Mary Poppins all nicey-nice. Ick! Yes, in the book she was stern and contrarian. But those kids adored her. And why not? Who wouldn't adore someone who took them on all those mysterious adventures?

OK, I really want to read Mary Poppins Now!!

[Katrinawitch]

The Lord of the Rings trilogy has been a favorite series of mine ever since I was in my early teens, and I've read it more than a few times. Loved it. When I heard that the trilogy was being made into a movie, I was more than a bit apprehensive.

Then when I saw the amazing work that Peter Jackson did, bringing the series to life, I was staggered! Absolutely fabulous! The actors, the locations, the art direction (so glad that he got Alan Lee and John Howe, two of the best Tolkien artists), the gorgeous costumes, the special effects (that don't look like effects) - it was all that I'd hoped for and more.

The only other movie I can think of that was better than the book was maybe Gone with the Wind. Only because of the scope and costumes and the whole look of the film. Loved the book, though I haven't read it in years, and I know they left quite a few characters out of the movie, but I think it was a great job all around.