2001: A Space Odyssey Even though the book is great up to the ending…
No, you are not alone. I like the novella, but the film is one of my favorites.
It’s a matter of personal taste, but other films I prefer to the books:
The Merchant-Ivory film Maurice. In E.M. Forster’s novel, Clive just sort of turns straight for no reason; in the film, he goes into the closet and gets married after one of his friends is arrested for picking up men in a bar and, a la Oscar Wilde, sent to prison. This seems much more plausible to me.
The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie. Six of the schoolgirls in the novel are made into four girls in the film by combining some of their characteristics–pretty Jenny is consolidated with the girl “who is known for sex,” and Mary MacGregor becomes the girl who runs off to Spain. I think this gives them a little more depth and focuses the story on a smaller group.
The Razor’s Edge. The Bill Murray film cut out the narrator character altogether, thus removing all the most smug and useless bits of the book. And yes, I liked the film.
[hijack]jr8 - I just turned sigs back on and have seen yours for the first time in this thread. That is my most favourite joke in the whole world! I laugh EVERY time. I love Eric and Ernie. God bless you for having that sig.[/hijack]
Glad to be the bearer of happy thoughts. It makes me laugh every time too.
God thats scary, I was just coming on to say Fight Club! Well, I third the people who said it before me, the book is very simplisticly written compared to how brilliant the movie is. Um, also to be a complete teenager, Looking for Alabrandi, the movie is better, likewise with riding in cars with boys (although neither the book or the movie are overly good)
Oh and Harry Potter the movie is so much better than the book!
Sorry, I was kidding with Harry Potter
What do you think I’m crazy, the movie was terrible
I considered leavign it there just to see what would happen, but I changed my mind its just too mean
another vote for ** The English Patient **
String me up, but I say the Lord of the Rings movies are better than the books.
The movie “Goodfellas” was as good as the book “Wiseguys.” It streamlined the cast of characters, but was otherwise faithful.
Hey, what is it with Morgan Freeman and being a character in a movie of a Stephen King book that’s different to the character in the actual book? Does he have dirt on King or something? “Hey, let me play the title role of Cujo or I’ll release a certain news statement, Kingy boy, bwa ha hahahaha”.
I’ll second Fight Club. It just hit a lot harder than the book did.
It’s a shame that we’ll never get to see “Survivor” on the big screen because there’s a plane hijacking in it. Even though no one is killed in the hijacking, and it’s not done as a terrorist act. Studios dropped this one like a hot potato after 9/11.
The 3 Musketeers and The Four Musketeers… the early 70’s version with Michael York, Oliver Reed, Raquel Welch, Christopher Lee, Faye Dunaway and Charleton Heston (to drop a few names) was as good as the book. And that’s saying something.
I’ll add my voice to the crowd for Fight Club - my housemate is a huge fan of the book and believes it’s better than the movie, but I can’t agree.
GMRyujin, you’re not the only one who thinks The Lord of the Rings movies are better than the books. I’ve read the books, but it was a struggle to get through them. I could watch the movies over and over again.
And normally, I hate book-to-movie translations.
Oh, thank god stringy, every time I express that opinion, the geeks are all ready to have me executed for blasphemy. They get genuinely mad at me, especially when I don’t cave. But, to me, half of the durn series was “Poor old Frodo” and proper Elvish table settings and lots of filler. And yes, you can call it world-building, but I call it bloody annoying. And I’ve read the books too.
The movie makes the story what it SHOULD be, as far as I’m concerned.
Blade Runner was a definite improvement over Dick’s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, and (it almost goes without saying) Apocalypse Now held its own against Heart of Darkness.
Day of the Jackal. The book was terrific and the movie was just as good. Not as many twists, but hey, the movie was only 2 hrs.
2001: I think the book was written AFTER the movie (or in conjuction with it), so Iwouldn’t say it counted.
LOTR: The movies so far have been fantastic. The books are tough to get thru unless you really enjoy them-- then it’s well worth the experience.
It was written in conjuction, but the OP never specififed a specific order, thus any movie/book combo is fair game IMO.
The movie was flat, the characters had no dimension, and most of what made it anything beyind “look, he’s chasing androids. oh boy” was missing. The only way I can see it being an improvement is if you needed the reflective surface of the DVD as a mirror.
I can’t swear to this since I can’t find the book but apparently “Dr. Stangelove” was a big improvemnet over “Red Alert” (like, they made it a comedy).
Oh, that is just so supid.
I hear they’re talking about “Choke” though…