The BBC miniseries is actually the original version of Neverwhere. Gaiman later adapted his own screenplay into a novel. IIRC he said part of the reason for this was he wanted to have a version out there with things he’d wanted to put in the series but that they didn’t have the budget to include.
It’s been a while since I last saw Stand By Me, but my recollection was it was pretty close to the novella and pretty well done, too.
It helps that it’s a novella, not a novel - came from the same collection as Shawshank Redemption. A more compact story means less abridging, and you can stay closer to the original plot. (Ditto 1408, since you’ve mentioned it - that was a short story.)
And the music was wonderful, too, particularly the Russian music.
I always thought Alec Baldwin was a far, far better Jack Ryan than Harrison Ford was. The Ryan of the books was (mostly) an intellectual even with his Naval academy background, and Baldwin conveyed that. Ford is mostly (not always, but mostly) an action hero, and while I liked Patriot Games I didn’t really like Ford’s interpretation of Ryan.
**
toast pakora**, I first saw *Diva *at university, at a campus theater. The entire audience cheered when Gorodish’s fancy car blew up with the villains in it and the garage door rolled up, revealing another fancy car exactly like it.
Beat me to it, all three.
I love the animated version of Watership Down. I get the same feelings as I do reading the book. Its excellent.
The movie is not at all faithful to the book, but I loved Bladerunner. (/sacrilege) It’s in many ways better. It keeps the questions on what it means to be human, and the look at empathy, but the story makes more sense. (/sacrilege)
A little bit off-topic.
Has anyone both read and seen Nobody’s Fool, the novel by Richard Russo, movie with Paul Newman? It’s my book club assignment and I’m finding the beginning of the book deadly dull and slow as molasses in January. Is the movie better?
A many have said, the LoTR movies, in my case really just the first one–especially the extended edition.
The Shire in the opening was better than I had ever pictured.
Bree was fun, and I did not like Moria, but Lorien was fine.
And Rivendale was just awesome.
The movie is not especially exciting, but I am very fond of it. It is a little like one of those painting movies, where the plot is background noise for the setting and characters.
That’s helpful. Thanks.
It is indeed - as an aside, I watched it as a kid when it first came out, and it caused a minor controversy.
It was marketed as a “kid’s movie”, for, like, young children: the poster showed a colourful cast of cute bunnies. Allegedly, many kids were traumatized! (I wasn’t: I loved it even then … more like many parents were traumatized). 
Yup. I think Red Dragon retained more plot details, but Manhunter captured the tone better. Red Dragon was edging into The Abominable Doctor Phibes territory.
And I still maintain that Brian Cox was the better Lecter.
Of my personal picks, Andromeda Strain, To Kill A Mockingbird and Catch 22 have already been mentioned, but I’d like to add Where Eagles Dare, which – while not one of the highest achievements as either a novel or film – is certainly entertaining in both forms, and a first-class adaptation.
I liked the book “Shoeless Joe” by W.P Kinsella, but I think the movie version (Field of Dreams) was even better.
The Milagro Beanfield War is the only book that I’ve read multiple times, and find it delightfully hilarious each time. When Redford decided to make a movie of it, I was apprehensive about how he could translate such sublime humor to the screen. He managed to make a decent job of it, although much was unsurprisingly lost in transition.
I agree with the above comment about The Body/Stand By Me. The novella thoroughly evoked my childhood, including hiking on the railroad tracks and crossing a tall trestle bridge. It really took me back; I could almost smell the summer air. Reiner did an astounding job of recreating that feeling on screen.
Fight Club - so good you named it twice! 
I agree with most of these.
Cormac McCarthy’s books, with their spare dialog, seem to be very susceptible to faithful movie adaptation, at least if you have a thoughtful director. The Coens did a great job with No Country for Old Men, and i also thought that Joe Penhall (script) and John Hillcoat (director) did an amazing job with The Road. Although i think “enjoy” is probably the wrong word to describe how i felt about that story; there are very few books or movies that are so unremittingly bleak.
I like the Bourne movies a lot, but i have to disagree about them surpassing the books. In fact, i tend to think of them more as inspired by the books, rather than being based on them. The first movie follows some elements of the book, but completely changes the whole purpose of Bourne’s work for the government. And the second and third movies literally take nothing except their titles and the character’s name from the books.
Absolutely.
Here’s another one where i have to disagree. I grew up on John Carter novels, and i was incredibly excited when i heard that they were making a movie, but i thought it was terrible.
Ms. Rowling does indeed find herself in some pretty heavy company. Advances in special effects really was necessary for these stories to be effectively adapted to film.
I found the Narnia movies to be…as good as they could be given the source material. I don’t mean to slam Lewis that hard–he was a pioneer of the genre as was Tolkien, and his tales are captivating–but I find him a bit “fluffy” compared to Tolkien.
It isn’t really fair to compare Narnia with LoTR though - the former was much more self-consciously a series for children. The better comparison is with The Hobbit, as it was more clearly written for children - though the series of movies based on The Hobbit, alas, didn’t turn out so well.
Point taken.
BTW, I did like the hobbit movies in their own right, but as an adaptation of the book…I struggle. Very much good, lots of embellishment that might have been tolerable but for the icky elf/elf/hurk dwarf love triangle which causes so much distraction as to make one go back and question the necessity of adding the whole Bolg & Radagast lines. Riddles in the Dark almost redeemed it all, however.
I think Syfy has done an excellent job with The Expanse. Holden doesn’t seem quite right, but otherwise, pretty faithful. Well aside from the physicality of the belters, but that is understandable.
I agree they weren’t as horrible as they are sometimes made out to be (though I also agree on the Elf-Dwarf love thing - gads).
I do think they are unlikely to make a list of “best adaptations” alongside LoTR, though.