Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 05-18-2020, 02:49 PM
Colibri's Avatar
Colibri is online now
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 45,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by XOldiesJock View Post
Colibri, you've given me something to think about. I haven't read "Moby Dick" since Freshman American Lit, 50 years ago. Hardly the best circumstances for appreciating a classic. I think I may still have the book from college. My wife read it back in the 80s (I think) and enjoyed it. Perhaps I should give it another shot with a more mature perspective!
When we read it in high school, my English teacher gave us a list of chapters we could skip if we wanted to. We didn't have to read all the chapters on whales and whaling.

You can get away with just reading the narrative chapters. But as a budding naturalist, the ones on whales were the ones I found most interesting.
  #52  
Old 05-18-2020, 02:51 PM
WildaBeast's Avatar
WildaBeast is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Folsom, CA
Posts: 1,376
I have not read Psycho, but given how highly acclaimed Hitchcock's movie was it seems like a good possibility. And that would lend credence to what Chronos said about Hitchcock choosing mediocre books to turn into movies.
  #53  
Old 05-18-2020, 02:56 PM
Ukulele Ike is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 18,754
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbh View Post
I read Moby Dick in high school English, and hated it. A few years later, I bought a copy on impulse, and read it cover-to-cover. If you read it at your own pace, and you don't have to write essays on the Symbolism and Meaning, it's a fun book.
Highly recommend the Arion Press/University of California edition, with woodcut illustrations by Barry Moser.
__________________
Uke
  #54  
Old 05-18-2020, 03:16 PM
Colibri's Avatar
Colibri is online now
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 45,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
Despite all those book tours and public readings Traven did to promote sales of his work.
I understand Banksy is his illegitimate son.

Traven's novels (whoever he was) were very successful in the 1930s and 1940s, and several besides Treasure of the Sierra Madre were made into movies, but none were remotely as popular as that one.
  #55  
Old 05-18-2020, 03:23 PM
TreacherousCretin's Avatar
TreacherousCretin is offline
Horrified Onlooker
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Moscow, Idaho
Posts: 5,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalMeacham View Post
The Day the Earth Stood Still -- definitely superior to Harry Bates' story Farewell to the Master
Agreed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by madsircool View Post
2 Robert Altman films: M*A*S*H...
Agreed. (I omitted "The Long Goodbye" because I'm not familiar with it.)

Hoping this doesn't lead to arguments, I'll submit Blade Runner. Far more thought provoking than the Androids/Electric Sheep story. Although I sometimes wonder if Ridley Scott's story is more of a "based on a story" than it is a film adaptation.
  #56  
Old 05-18-2020, 03:28 PM
Siam Sam is offline
Elephant Whisperer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Posts: 42,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by madsircool View Post
IMHO, both The Shining and Dr Sleep were better movies than the books. I realize this will be a minority opinion.
I agree with you about The Shining. But for Doctor Sleep, I found the novel vastly superior, especially the ending.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Asking Questions View Post
The World According to Garp is my choice.

In the movie, you have to imagine Garp's book from the montage with the gloves and the falling piano, and Garp's description. "...when he takes the gloves off, he finally touches his family, but he dies."* "If that's what it's about, I like it!"

In the book, Irving actually includes an excerpt. All it shows is that Irving isn't as good a writer as Garp. For things like that, it's best to leave magical writing to the reader's imagination.

PLus, I love the cyclical nature of the film, the constant repetition of themes as if the movie were the score of a play. None of that is in the book.

But the book does have a large section on how every character died. Kind of a bummer ending, dude. More to the point, you could do that with every novel ever written. It doesn't really add anything, or tell you anything insightful. It's not all that clever.



*from memory
I loved that ending, which is just one of the many ways the book is better. (It was sort of like what they did at the end of Six Feet Under.) But I don't recall the plane crashing into the house being in the book, and I did like that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Colibri View Post
When we read it in high school, my English teacher gave us a list of chapters we could skip if we wanted to. We didn't have to read all the chapters on whales and whaling.

You can get away with just reading the narrative chapters. But as a budding naturalist, the ones on whales were the ones I found most interesting.
You can buy abridged versions of great novels where they leave that sort of stuff out for you, but I hate those. My personal feeling is if it was important enough for the author to go to the trouble of writing that, then I'm darned well going to read it.
__________________
"Hell is other people." -- Jean-Paul Sartre
  #57  
Old 05-18-2020, 03:30 PM
AHunter3's Avatar
AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 21,238
Quote:
Originally Posted by madsircool View Post
IMHO, both The Shining and Dr Sleep were better movies than the books. I realize this will be a minority opinion.
There is hardly any movie and not that many books better than Stephen King's book The Shining. It's his best book.
  #58  
Old 05-18-2020, 03:32 PM
madsircool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 8,666
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siam Sam View Post
I agree with you about The Shining. But for Doctor Sleep, I found the novel vastly superior, especially the ending.



You might give the Directors Cut of Dr Sleep a chance. While it adds another 30 minutes to an already long film, the added material is mostly filling out scenes already in the film. I thought it superior to the original version and further develops the characters.
  #59  
Old 05-18-2020, 05:54 PM
CalMeacham's Avatar
CalMeacham is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 45,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
If we include tv series, the Star Trek episode "Arena" is better than Fredric Brown's short story.

.
Blasphemy!

I challenge you, sir!

Phasers at dawn!
__________________
The makers of the GoPro have to come out with a model called the "Quid"
  #60  
Old 05-18-2020, 06:00 PM
nearwildheaven is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 14,212
"Awakenings." Movie much better than book, although that's not hard for Oliver Sacks because while he was a great doctor, most of his books were rather, um, turgid? Is that the right word? Except for his autobiography, "On The Move", the ones I've read were difficult to follow.
  #61  
Old 05-18-2020, 07:19 PM
TreacherousCretin's Avatar
TreacherousCretin is offline
Horrified Onlooker
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Moscow, Idaho
Posts: 5,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post
There is hardly any movie and not that many books better than Stephen King's book The Shining. It's his best book.
I read it in 1980. My first exposure to Stephen King, who I eventually lost interest in by 1990. Of the dozen or so books of his that I did read, for me The Shining is his best by far.
It's also the only time any book or movie has scared the crap out of me. Lying on the couch in broad daylight, hesitating to turn the damn page. Became aware of my heart racing, and was embarrassed to realize I felt like I was eight-years old at a monster movie. I was THIRTY, for Christ's sake. Put the book down, took a deep breath, and only then realized that the hairs on my neck were literally standing on end. First and last time I've ever had that sensation in any context.

Yes, the scene involved Room 217.
  #62  
Old 05-18-2020, 07:24 PM
bmoak is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,351
All my usual choices (Jaws, The Godfather, Field of Dreams, Being There) are taken, but here are a few more:

The movie of The DaVinci Code is better than the book, solely because the book's prose is so painful.

Full Metal Jacket is better than the novel it was based on (The Short-Timers), although a lot of that has to do with the strengths of the actors' performances.

While definitely not true for the other movies in the series, I always thought that Prince Caspian was the weakest of the Narnia books and I thought the movie made some improvements on it.
  #63  
Old 05-18-2020, 09:32 PM
Gray Ghost is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by LVBoPeep View Post
Granted, I did see The Prestige before I read the book but I thought the movie was much better. Maybe the twist just went off better visually than on paper, plus I thought it was one of Christian Bale's best roles.
Another one of his roles that fits the OP is Patrick Bateman from American Psycho. I never realized it was a comedy until Mary Harron's excellent adaptation of Bret Easton Ellis's novel. The novel is turgid, lumbering, and a snuff book in parts. The movie is much more smartly paced, gleefully making fun of the entire era and especially the shallow vapid, venal people he both is part of, and preys upon.

Last edited by Gray Ghost; 05-18-2020 at 09:33 PM.
  #64  
Old 05-18-2020, 10:05 PM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 86,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalMeacham View Post
Blasphemy!

I challenge you, sir!

Phasers at dawn!
Really? I thought the changed ending of the Star Trek episode really added a lot to the basic story. Without that ending, the original story wasn't terrible but it was pretty one-dimensional.
  #65  
Old 05-18-2020, 10:54 PM
gkster is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 5,966
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alessan View Post
YMMV, but "The Princess Bride". I found William Goldman's novel nasty, cynical and unpleasant to read, and I credit Rob Reiner with paring it down to the movie we love - the best parts of the good parts, as it were.
Thanks for the warning! I've been reading "The Princess Bride" on and off for a few months, have only gotten around 30 pages in and wondering all the time when it was going to get better.
  #66  
Old 05-18-2020, 11:06 PM
TreacherousCretin's Avatar
TreacherousCretin is offline
Horrified Onlooker
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Moscow, Idaho
Posts: 5,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by gkster View Post
Thanks for the warning! I've been reading "The Princess Bride" on and off for a few months, have only gotten around 30 pages in and wondering all the time when it was going to get better.
I read As You Wish by Cary Elwes a few months ago. His first-person story of what it was like to make the film. (No spoiler here) It's a really good little book. Fun to read.
  #67  
Old 05-19-2020, 04:04 AM
kitap is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 588
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ukulele Ike View Post
Highly recommend the Arion Press/University of California edition, with woodcut illustrations by Barry Moser.
I recommend the Richard Armour retelling in The Classics Reclassified.
  #68  
Old 05-19-2020, 06:36 AM
CalMeacham's Avatar
CalMeacham is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 45,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
Really? I thought the changed ending of the Star Trek episode really added a lot to the basic story. Without that ending, the original story wasn't terrible but it was pretty one-dimensional.
Really?

I thought that that Roddenbery-inspired ending was his usual Pollyannish view of things. Sometimes the Bad Guys are just irredeemably Bad -- as Fredric Brown makes very clear in his story. Carson does try to negotiate with the Outsider, difficult as that is under the circumstances, but he's flatly turned down.

And Brown's situation (and solution) are a helluva lot more clever than inventing gunpowder,
__________________
The makers of the GoPro have to come out with a model called the "Quid"
  #69  
Old 05-19-2020, 06:38 AM
CalMeacham's Avatar
CalMeacham is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 45,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by TreacherousCretin View Post
I read As You Wish by Cary Elwes a few months ago. His first-person story of what it was like to make the film. (No spoiler here) It's a really good little book. Fun to read.
I agree. I read this a couple of months ago, too.

I wish Elwes had gotten a few better roles. He was good as Dudley in the virtually unknown Lady Jane Grey, and he was the perfect tool for sending up Robin Hood in Mel Brook's film, but everything else he was in -- not his performance -- was second-rate.
__________________
The makers of the GoPro have to come out with a model called the "Quid"
  #70  
Old 05-19-2020, 11:15 AM
hogarth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 7,653
I thought the 2016 ITV adaptation of Trollope's "Doctor Thorne" was an improvement on the novel; it was more briskly paced and cut out some of the meandering subplots.
  #71  
Old 05-19-2020, 11:33 AM
Dr. Winston OBoogie is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 57
One book/movie that I always bring up in discussions like this is A Clockwork Orange. Both the book and movie are fantastic, but in different ways. The imagery in the movie is fantastic; the book fleshes out many of the scenes.

And, just to add on to kicking Stephen King, the movie Cujo was much better than the book, and the movie sucked.
  #72  
Old 05-19-2020, 11:38 AM
madsircool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 8,666
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Winston OBoogie View Post
One book/movie that I always bring up in discussions like this is A Clockwork Orange. Both the book and movie are fantastic, but in different ways. The imagery in the movie is fantastic; the book fleshes out many of the scenes.

And, just to add on to kicking Stephen King, the movie Cujo was much better than the book, and the movie sucked.
King was a cocaine addict and he really doesnt remember writing Cujo.

https://www.mamamia.com.au/stephen-king-books/
  #73  
Old 05-19-2020, 12:51 PM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 86,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalMeacham View Post
Really?

I thought that that Roddenbery-inspired ending was his usual Pollyannish view of things. Sometimes the Bad Guys are just irredeemably Bad -- as Fredric Brown makes very clear in his story. Carson does try to negotiate with the Outsider, difficult as that is under the circumstances, but he's flatly turned down.

And Brown's situation (and solution) are a helluva lot more clever than inventing gunpowder,
I disagree on both points.

I'll spoiler this even though we're talking about a story that was published in 1944 and a TV show that was broadcast in 1967.

On the enemies:

SPOILER:
I feel the Gorn (from the TV show) were set up as more interesting characters. The show made them initially look like pure evil. But by the end of the show, we learned that they were just an ordinary alien race, no better or worse than humans, who had their own legitimate claims from their viewpoint. In Star Trek's expanded canon, the Gorn end up being a close ally of the Federation.

I feel this is much better than Good Guys fighting Bad Guys, with the Outsiders being nothing more than a stereotype of evil who literally torture small animals.


On how the hero won:

SPOILER:
Another area where I feel the TV show did a better job. I liked the idea of Kirk winning the fight by making some gunpowder and building a small cannon. It showed that he won by using his brain.

Carson won because of luck. If the alien hadn't tortured the lizard, if the lizard had remained conscious, if the lizard had died, if the alien hadn't thrown the lizard through the barrier, if the lizard had died before Carson found it, if the other lizard hadn't approached Carson - any one of those would have broken the chain of random events that led Carson to the solution to his problem. Along with his luck in being able to knock himself unconscious just long enough to get through the barrier but not long enough for the alien to kill him.

Carson won because he had a long string of luck. It was the alien who had a plan for winning and was building catapults.


On the plots:

SPOILER:
Brown's story was one dimensional. A human and an alien are told to fight. They fight. The human wins. That's literally the entire plot.

Coon's story had a plot twist. A human and an alien are told to fight. They fight. The human wins. But then the human refuses to kill his opponent as he had been told to do. Then the superior aliens return and say this was the correct answer. So there turned out to be a surface level to the test, where the human and the alien fought each other, and a hidden level, where the Metrons were watching to see if one of the opponents would rise above the conditions they had been placed in.
  #74  
Old 05-19-2020, 02:23 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by silenus View Post
The Lord of the Rings trilogy

There, I said it.
Admittedly, it's pretty close.
  #75  
Old 05-19-2020, 02:46 PM
silenus's Avatar
silenus is offline
Isaiah 10:1-3
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 52,495
I've watched the movies repeatedly, with all the extended cuts. I never managed to finish the books. Boring as hell, they were.
  #76  
Old 05-19-2020, 02:56 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,721
Quote:
Originally Posted by furryman View Post
I liked the movie The Mouse that Roared better than the book. I think that it's due to Peter Sellers.
I thought the movie Dune was better than the book because it was easier to understand what was going on.
Oh gawd no.

I liked the Mouse that Roared as a book, but Sellers crapped all over the movie. I cant watch it.
  #77  
Old 05-19-2020, 03:00 PM
dorvann is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,055
I have always liked The Wizard of Oz and the Lord of the Rings movies better than their respective books. In both cases the books are great, the movie are great; I just like the movies better. Same for Hunger Games and Harry Potter.

I think the The Thing(1982 film) is better than the short story "Who Goes There Are?" it is based on. And the Twilight Zone episode "It's a Good Life" is better than the short story it is based on.
  #78  
Old 05-19-2020, 03:02 PM
dorvann is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,055
Emmett Otter's Jug Band Christmas TV special is better than the children's picture book it is based on.
  #79  
Old 05-19-2020, 03:29 PM
Colibri's Avatar
Colibri is online now
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 45,466
Quote:
Originally Posted by silenus View Post
I've watched the movies repeatedly, with all the extended cuts. I never managed to finish the books. Boring as hell, they were.
That doesn't mean the books are bad. All too often people seem to believe "I don't like it" = "bad."
  #80  
Old 05-19-2020, 03:30 PM
Colibri's Avatar
Colibri is online now
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 45,466
On that note, I will say that The Ten Commandments was a lot better than the book it was based on.
  #81  
Old 05-19-2020, 06:57 PM
CalMeacham's Avatar
CalMeacham is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 45,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
I disagree on both points.

I'll spoiler this even though we're talking about a story that was published in 1944 and a TV show that was broadcast in 1967.

On the enemies:

SPOILER:
I feel the Gorn (from the TV show) were set up as more interesting characters. The show made them initially look like pure evil. But by the end of the show, we learned that they were just an ordinary alien race, no better or worse than humans, who had their own legitimate claims from their viewpoint. In Star Trek's expanded canon, the Gorn end up being a close ally of the Federation.

I feel this is much better than Good Guys fighting Bad Guys, with the Outsiders being nothing more than a stereotype of evil who literally torture small animals.


On how the hero won:

SPOILER:
Another area where I feel the TV show did a better job. I liked the idea of Kirk winning the fight by making some gunpowder and building a small cannon. It showed that he won by using his brain.

Carson won because of luck. If the alien hadn't tortured the lizard, if the lizard had remained conscious, if the lizard had died, if the alien hadn't thrown the lizard through the barrier, if the lizard had died before Carson found it, if the other lizard hadn't approached Carson - any one of those would have broken the chain of random events that led Carson to the solution to his problem. Along with his luck in being able to knock himself unconscious just long enough to get through the barrier but not long enough for the alien to kill him.

Carson won because he had a long string of luck. It was the alien who had a plan for winning and was building catapults.


On the plots:

SPOILER:
Brown's story was one dimensional. A human and an alien are told to fight. They fight. The human wins. That's literally the entire plot.

Coon's story had a plot twist. A human and an alien are told to fight. They fight. The human wins. But then the human refuses to kill his opponent as he had been told to do. Then the superior aliens return and say this was the correct answer. So there turned out to be a surface level to the test, where the human and the alien fought each other, and a hidden level, where the Metrons were watching to see if one of the opponents would rise above the conditions they had been placed in.

I couldn't disagree more.


Forget the "expanded canon" The Gorn were initially painted as EVIIL invaders (and you have to admit, sneak-attacking a colony, even if it's there without realizing they were squatting is a Dick Move). At the end Kirk realizes they mighht have a point. There's no real characterization.

The Gunpowder schtick was old when they did it on TV, and Kirk was damned lucky his quickly-thrown-together stuff worked.

Carson didn't win by luck. Both he and the Outsider tried various things to get at the other -- making a spear, making a catapult, maqking fire bombs. Carson tried and tested lots of hypotheses to try to figure out how the alien Arena setup worked, logically deducing the "physics" of the situation. He won because he figured out how the setup worked, and used it to his advantage. He didn't just climb up to the top of a hill and fall into the correct solution.

And, yes, it was a story about one side vs. the other, with one side demonstrated to be pretty irrevocably bad. It wasn't just tearing the limbs off multlegged lizards. The Ousiders had been systematically wiping out earth bases (not a single mistaken attack on one). Carson's attempt to communicate with the Outsider showed that it had no intention of relenting or cooperating. And he had the word of the Overmind (or whatever you want to call it) that there was no foreseeable peace between them.

But just because it's a case of Good vs. Evil doesn't make it trivial or one-dimensional.
__________________
The makers of the GoPro have to come out with a model called the "Quid"
  #82  
Old 05-19-2020, 09:34 PM
steepone is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by XOldiesJock View Post

One that immediately comes to mind is "Moby Dick," the movie made in the 50s starring Gregory Peck as Captain Ahab, directed by John Huston, with screenplay by Huston and Ray Bradbury. Anyone who had to slog through Melville's novel in an American Lit class knows what I'm talking about. Huston and Bradbury cut out all the boring stuff and turned it into a remarkable adventure story.
I totally agree with this, the book seemed to drag on and on, it's definitely not a book I would ever read for pleasure
  #83  
Old 05-19-2020, 10:23 PM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 86,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalMeacham View Post
I couldn't disagree more.
Okay, it's obvious we have a fundamental difference of opinion here and not just an unclear understanding of each other's position. So de gustibus non est disputandum and all that.
  #84  
Old 05-20-2020, 08:01 AM
Robot Arm is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Medford, MA
Posts: 23,808
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalMeacham View Post
Goldfinger -- this one's practically obligatory in these threads. The movie observed the logical shortciomings in the book (Goldfinger really DID want to steal the gold from Fort Knox) and fixed it.
The movie had its problems, too. Bond borrowed a bar of gold, set up a golf game with Goldfinger, caught him cheating and turned the tables, all so he could get close enough to Goldfinger's Rolls Royce to plant a homing transmitter on it. The receiver is in his tricked-out Aston Martin. With all this cutting-edge technology and spycraft, Bond follows Goldfinger to...

...a factory with "Auric Enterprises" written on it in huge letters. I could have found that with a rental car and a phone book.
  #85  
Old 05-20-2020, 09:11 AM
Dewey Finn is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 30,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siam Sam View Post
You can buy abridged versions of great novels where they leave that sort of stuff out for you, but I hate those. My personal feeling is if it was important enough for the author to go to the trouble of writing that, then I'm darned well going to read it.
I "read" Moby Dick in school as required reading in English class and it was quite a slog to get through. I remember an entire chapter being about a rope on the ship. (Later, though, in thinking about the novel, it might have made more sense if I understood the Biblical origin of the names, like Ahab or Ishmael.) And in another English class, we read Billy Budd, in which the title character is described so lovingly that we concluded Melville was gay, although the teacher denied it.

And as a kid, I read lots on my own. I tried to read one classic novel in unabridged form. I think it was Robinson Crusoe, but the unabridged version was so long and so dull. We also had to read some Dickens novels in school and it seemed obvious that he was being paid by the word. (Much of his stuff was serialized and he was paid by the word.)
  #86  
Old 05-20-2020, 09:14 AM
DesertDog is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Mesa, Ariz.
Posts: 6,470
Quote:
Originally Posted by silenus View Post
I've watched the movies repeatedly, with all the extended cuts. I never managed to finish the books. Boring as hell, they were.
I just got done watching a YouTube video where a guy runs the LOTR trilogy over three evenings for his parents, brother, and SIL none of whom had seen it before. All of them kept whining about how boring it was.

I highly doubt they'd read the books, either, or -- I'm being judgmental here -- much of anything else.
  #87  
Old 05-20-2020, 10:42 AM
silenus's Avatar
silenus is offline
Isaiah 10:1-3
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 52,495
I didn't think the books were bad....just boring. To me. I'd sooner try (again) to make it through the complete Don Quixiote than try LotR one more time.
  #88  
Old 05-20-2020, 12:36 PM
Acierocolotl is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Posts: 69
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim R. Mortiss View Post
I've heard that Chuck Palahniuk (author of "Fight Club") thought that the movie was better than his book. Not having read the book, I can't offer an opinion, but if the author himself says so, that's got to count for something.
I have strong opinions about books turned into movies, and generally find the movies wanting. In the case of Fight Club, I have read the book (my wife owns it) and seen the movie a few times, and to me it's completely unquestionable: the movie is vastly superior to the book. My wife feels differently about this; the book stuck with her and I barely remember any of the details at this point.

Anyway! it feels like movies sort of gloss over much detail and remove the rest, leaving a highly-varnished treatment of the book's main tropes. In this case, the movie actually added detail and clarification. This is partially because the movie itself was good (in my opinion, of course) and partially because the book was incredibly sparse.
  #89  
Old 05-20-2020, 12:46 PM
divemaster's Avatar
divemaster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Gainesville, VA
Posts: 4,316
Forrest Gump.

The Exorcist.
  #90  
Old 05-20-2020, 12:51 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 88,589
Movies inherently must remove lots of detail, except in so far as that detail is describing something visual. A novel's worth of nonvisual detail would take a six-hour movie to translate it faithfully, but a whole chapter of visual description can be condensed into a minute of cinematography.
  #91  
Old 05-20-2020, 12:56 PM
Icerigger's Avatar
Icerigger is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UFP SECTOR 001
Posts: 3,464
Dead Calm
The Sand Pebbles
Flight of the Phoenix
The Deep

Often I would try to find and read the books from films that I liked.
  #92  
Old 05-20-2020, 01:12 PM
Jackmannii's Avatar
Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 33,394
Two picks for movies much superior to the books they were based on.

Bridge On The River Kwai took a fairly good story and made it into a much more compelling, classic movie.

Gorky Park worked because it tightened up a rambling, overly long book.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dropo View Post
The 39 Steps – Hitchcock’s 1935 film made several critical improvements, including eliminating some gratuitous anti-Semitism, adding Mr. Memory and changing the significance of the eponymous steps.
I couldn't disagree more. Apart from the anti-Semitic reference (which is a brief, tiny plot element), the novel by John Buchan is a compelling mystery and great fun, while I thought the movie made unnecessary, detrimental plot changes and dragged by comparison.
  #93  
Old 05-20-2020, 01:30 PM
bump is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 19,671
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalMeacham View Post
I agree. I read this a couple of months ago, too.

I wish Elwes had gotten a few better roles. He was good as Dudley in the virtually unknown Lady Jane Grey, and he was the perfect tool for sending up Robin Hood in Mel Brook's film, but everything else he was in -- not his performance -- was second-rate.
I guess he's only mostly dead...

He was a fine corrupt mayor in Stranger Things, and was an entertaining guest star on Psych for a few episodes.

I wonder if "The Wolf of Wall Street" (movie) is better than the book. I've heard lots of people talk about the movie, but I can't recall having heard anyone EVER say they'd read the book, which doesn't bode well for the book being any good.

Last edited by bump; 05-20-2020 at 01:31 PM.
  #94  
Old 05-20-2020, 01:42 PM
Dallas Jones is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Orygun forest
Posts: 5,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colibri View Post
On that note, I will say that The Ten Commandments was a lot better than the book it was based on.
I know you are just being funny, but that movie is quite an epic production, famous cast, sets, it should be seen just for that even if you don't agree with the subject matter. Every one who was anybody in Hollywood, at the time, was in that movie.

Hence the Blazing Saddles quote "I've killed more people than Cecil B. DeMille."
  #95  
Old 05-20-2020, 01:57 PM
hogarth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 7,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just Asking Questions View Post
The World According to Garp is my choice.
I think I liked the movie "The Cider House Rules" about as much as the book, and it has the added advantage that it's much shorter.
  #96  
Old 05-20-2020, 03:09 PM
Siam Sam is offline
Elephant Whisperer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Posts: 42,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey Finn View Post
I "read" Moby Dick in school as required reading in English class and it was quite a slog to get through. I remember an entire chapter being about a rope on the ship. (Later, though, in thinking about the novel, it might have made more sense if I understood the Biblical origin of the names, like Ahab or Ishmael.) And in another English class, we read Billy Budd, in which the title character is described so lovingly that we concluded Melville was gay, although the teacher denied it.

And as a kid, I read lots on my own. I tried to read one classic novel in unabridged form. I think it was Robinson Crusoe, but the unabridged version was so long and so dull. We also had to read some Dickens novels in school and it seemed obvious that he was being paid by the word. (Much of his stuff was serialized and he was paid by the word.)
I did read Moby-Dick (with the hyphen is the correct rendering) for pleasure a couple of years ago and very much enjoyed it. However, I do think if I'd had to read it as a punk high-schooler, I would not have liked it so much. By the time I got around to it, I was more mature, better educated and had already gotten into many of the classics.


Quote:
Originally Posted by hogarth View Post
I think I liked the movie "The Cider House Rules" about as much as the book, and it has the added advantage that it's much shorter.
I loved the book and absolutely hated the movie. Worst of all, the film dropped the entire subplot with Melony. It was almost like an entirely different story.
__________________
"Hell is other people." -- Jean-Paul Sartre
  #97  
Old 05-20-2020, 03:37 PM
TimfromNapa is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 304
[QUOTE=Just Asking Questions;22309030]The World According to Garp is my choice.

In the movie, you have to imagine Garp's book from the montage with the gloves and the falling piano, and Garp's description. "...when he takes the gloves off, he finally touches his family, but he dies."* "If that's what it's about, I like it!"

In the book, Irving actually includes an excerpt. All it shows is that Irving isn't as good a writer as Garp. For things like that, it's best to leave magical writing to the reader's imagination.

PLus, I love the cyclical nature of the film, the constant repetition of themes as if the movie were the score of a play. None of that is in the book.

But the book does have a large section on how every character died. Kind of a bummer ending, dude. More to the point, you could do that with every novel ever written. It doesn't really add anything, or tell you anything insightful. It's not all that clever.


I could not agree with you more, especially your last paragraph. That was the first movie/book title that came to my mind.
  #98  
Old 05-20-2020, 05:02 PM
Mama Zappa is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tamerlane View Post
Happy ending vs. very melancholy ending. I like happy endings generally, but I think the graphic novel packs a little more unexpected punch. That said I agree both are pretty decent( the movie benefits quite a bit from the campy Michelle Pfeiffer performance ).
Aside from the Captain Shakespeare bit (WTF??????) I tend to agree with you. I loved the book as well but rereading it after the movie reminded me of the truly depressing ending of the book.

A Little Mermaid. As Disneyfied as the whole thing was, the original tale by Hans Christian Andersen is really depressing. Hell, everything by Anderson is depressing (The Fir Tree, The Little Match Girl....). The man was CRUEL.
__________________
My COVID-19 mantra: "People. Are. Morons."
  #99  
Old 05-21-2020, 11:19 AM
DesertDog is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Mesa, Ariz.
Posts: 6,470
Tell me about it. I suspect he wasn't writing stories so much as Important Lessons in Life. I think the most highly Disneyfied treatment on record has to be Frozen. After I went and read HCA's seed, The Ice Queen, I concurred. About all that was taken from it by Disney was that it's cold, and the names of two of the palace staff, Gerda and Kai. Had much more of the original had been used, I'm picturing angry parents stalking out of the theater with bawling kids in tow.
  #100  
Old 05-21-2020, 02:06 PM
krondys's Avatar
krondys is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Gillette, Wyoming
Posts: 1,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Chance View Post
Wow, really? Couldn't disagree more.

SPOILER:
In the book, humans - represented by Grant et al - survive against the raptors through knowledge and brains. They take advantage of knowing that the raptors eat eggs by poisoning the eggs and exposing them to the raptors who then die.

In the movie, there's just a Tyrannus Ex Machina who comes out of nowhere to eat the raptors, save the humans and pose for the camera. There's no way at all that humanity earns its right to survive in the movie.
Thank you. I was gobsmacked, myself.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:25 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017