# Instances of the movie actually improving on the book **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [April 9, 2004, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200 "2004-04-09T17:37:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Tentacle\_Monster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ba9def/32.png) [@Tentacle\_Monster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tentacle_Monster)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/1 "2004-04-09T17:37:49Z")
In the book _Red Dragon_ Hannibal Lecter is given use of a phone to call his lawyer, and he instead dials another number. In the movie, he is given a hotline phone which automatically connects to his lawyer. He taps the hook to dial the number, which is possible on the old-style pulse system. ---
**Author:** ![Bippy\_the\_Beardless](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ac8455/32.png) [@Bippy\_the\_Beardless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bippy_the_Beardless)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/2 "2004-04-09T17:51:58Z")
Please don’t mention ‘Red Dragon’ when ‘Manhunter’ had a similar idea first. I susspect a lot of films where the book was written after the film will fall into this category , ‘Star Wars’ comes to mind. Can’t think of anything like this where the book came first. ---
**Author:** ![RikWriter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/49beb7/32.png) [@RikWriter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RikWriter)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/3 "2004-04-09T17:54:23Z")
Jaws. The book was wretched and laughable, particularly the “affair” between Hooper and Mrs. Brody. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/4 "2004-04-09T18:08:14Z")
Tried and failed several tiems to post this… strange. I feel the \*Lord of the Rings \* movies improved on the books in many ways, most importantly by clarifying the narrative. The books sort of meander. ---
**Author:** ![Doomtrain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/0ea827/32.png) [@Doomtrain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Doomtrain)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/5 "2004-04-09T18:09:42Z")
_Lord of the Rings_ cut out all the fluff and told the story in spectacular fashion. I just sold my LOTR box set because I can’t imagine trying to read all that again. Especially when the movie’s on DVD. ---
**Author:** ![Kyomara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8edcca/32.png) [@Kyomara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyomara)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/6 "2004-04-09T18:10:48Z")
_Fight Club_ was a shitty book. ---
**Author:** ![Nonsuch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nonsuch/32/2922_2.png) [@Nonsuch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nonsuch)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/7 "2004-04-09T18:18:01Z")
_The Last Detail_ considerably improves on its source novel. ---
**Author:** ![MLS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/919ad9/32.png) [@MLS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MLS)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/8 "2004-04-09T18:24:04Z")
Forrest Gump. After seeing the movie, I found the book on which it was based. Terrible. The author had be quoted as bemoaning the fact that before the movie no one was buying his book. For good reason IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![atrain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/57b2e6/32.png) [@atrain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/atrain)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/9 "2004-04-09T18:26:08Z")
Can’t say it improved on the book, but The Shawshank Redemption movie came pretty damn close, considering that the book was pretty good as well. Although maybe I’m just partial to Morgan Freeman… ---
**Author:** ![Judith\_Prietht](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b19c9b/32.png) [@Judith\_Prietht](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Judith_Prietht)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/10 "2004-04-09T18:29:30Z")
I don’t know if **Adaptation** greatly improved on the book so much as provides a deeply interesting companion piece to it. The book, **The Orchid Thief** , is pretty much straight-up nonfiction and quirky journalism, but the film turns that foundational material into something emotionally powerful and philosophically relevant. ---
**Author:** ![Kaspar\_Hauser](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/b3f665/32.png) [@Kaspar\_Hauser](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kaspar_Hauser)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/11 "2004-04-09T18:49:03Z")
_The Godfather_. ---
**Author:** ![Darkhold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/90db22/32.png) [@Darkhold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darkhold)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/12 "2004-04-09T19:02:03Z")
Harrison Bergeron (sp?) the short story was painfully dull and dumb and it was turned into a fairly interesting movie. Lawmower man, Frankly how did they get that movie from the story? It’s about a fat guy that eats grass his mower cuts. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/13 "2004-04-09T19:02:03Z")
The Commitments Roddy Doyle is good author, and very funny, but his combination use of dialect and instance on telling the story through lyrics makes it a difficult book for someone not Irish or familiar with the lyrics to get through. (His other Barrytown trilogy books are far more readable). ---
**Author:** ![Hal\_Briston](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a9a28c/32.png) [@Hal\_Briston](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hal_Briston)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/14 "2004-04-09T19:50:11Z")
I’ll second _Jaws_ and _Forrest Gump_, and throw _Get Shorty_ in the mix. The movie was terrific, but the book? Meh… ---
**Author:** ![chula](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a4c791/32.png) [@chula](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chula)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/15 "2004-04-09T20:36:20Z")
_Como agua para chocolate_ / _Like Water for Chocolate_. Incidentally, I believe it was the writer’s husband who made the film. ---
**Author:** ![tremorviolet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e47774/32.png) [@tremorviolet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tremorviolet)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/16 "2004-04-09T20:38:08Z")
_About a Boy_. THe boook was also good but I think the movie excelled. Also, _The Princess Bride_. The movie is a classic, the book is merely a good read. ---
**Author:** ![widdershins](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f0a364/32.png) [@widdershins](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/widdershins)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/17 "2004-04-09T20:43:20Z")
_The Professionals_ improves on the book (_A Mule for the Marquesa_ by Frank O’Rourke) by merging the six bland members of the rescue team into four distinct individuals with depth and flaws. It also take a pretty by the numbers adventure story (the “cavalry” even rides to the rescue) and turns it on its head by asking “Who’s really the kidnapper?” _The Americanization of Emily_ adds a satiric anti-war tone missing from the book; it also makes the main character more likable. He’s still a smug opportunist, but in the book I found myself rooting for bad stuff to happen to him. The romance is also handled better in the movie, in the book it’s just a foregone conclusion that he will get the girl. _Being There_. The book reads like a rough draft needing to be fleshed out, a fable rather than a whole story. The movie has more structure, and is less repetative than the book. _Point Blank_ The book, _The Hunter_ by Richard Stark/Donald Westlake, is a starightforward genre pulp crime drama, the movie is an odd ghost story with film noir touches. You remember the movie afterward, not the book. _Valdez Is Coming_. The movie handles the racism in the Old West theme in a more meaningful way than the book, mostly by fleshing out all the characters more convincingly. The characters are mean or even evil just out of macho ornriness in the book, they’d act that way no matter the race of the other person. ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/18 "2004-04-09T20:50:30Z")
I don’t remember the moving staircases being in the _Harry Potter_ books, but they were certainly a great touch. I second _About a Boy_- the ending of the book, while good, permanently anchored it into the early 1990s [spoiler]it takes place on the weekend after Kurt Cobain’s death\* but the movie ending made it more temporally universal. _Cold Mountain_ lost many sideplots in the move from book to movie, but also made it more coherent and made Ruby’s relationship with her father more believable. _Simon Birch_, imo, was an improvement on _A Prayer for Owen Meany_ by clipping off so much of the book that tended to drag and meander and making it a shorter but more fluid narrative. (OTOH, the great shortening of _Cider House Rules_ for the movie detracted.) ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/19 "2004-04-09T20:54:26Z")
Almost forgot a couple of biggies: Changing the setting of _Chocolat_ to the 1950s imo made it far more believable. And the film of _GWTW_ was in many ways more enjoyable than the book (gone being the 16 inch waistlines and other unbelievable elements), though I missed many of the supporting characters who were cut. With the exception of Ashley (no teenager would swoon for Leslie Howard) I thought the characterizations were better in the movie than in the book as well. The movie is of course far more mythological than historical, but then the book wasn’t that historically grounded either. ---
**Author:** ![Just\_Ed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19b73/32.png) [@Just\_Ed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Just_Ed)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2004, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200/20 "2004-04-09T21:11:50Z")
> [@Darkhold](#): > > Lawmower man, Frankly how did they get that movie from the story? It’s about a fat guy that eats grass his mower cuts. Well, actually, they _didn’t_. King sued and succeeded in getting his name removed from the film; it simply bears no relation to his story other than the title. No idea why. On topic, I liked _Field of Dreams_ much more than _Shoeless Joe_ by W. P. Kinsella, but that may be due to the fact I saw the film first and had its specific storyline firmly entrenched in my mind when I read the book. Changing the author to the fictional character portrayed by James Earl Jones in the film from J. D. Salinger seemed to work well (although I believe this was done for legal reasons as well as story). [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/instances-of-the-movie-actually-improving-on-the-book/239200.md?page=2)