# Movies that diverged from the novel, but in a good way **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [July 14, 2004, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100 "2004-07-14T16:53:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2004, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/1 "2004-07-14T16:53:24Z")
Usually, when a film adaptation of a novel introduces new plot elements, the result is bad, at least in my opinion. But occasionally it works very well because it’s something that seems appropriate to the original novel or author. For instance, there’s no balloon scene in the novel _Around The World In 80 Days_, but no one can complain that they put the balloon scene in the movie, where they fly over the Alps. Besides being a breathtakingly beautiful sequence, it is so clearly in the spirit of Jules Verne that one wonders why he didn’t put it in the book. What are some other good book-to-film plot digressions? ---
**Author:** ![Kilt-wearin\_man](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kilt-wearin\_man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kilt-wearin_man)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2004, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/2 "2004-07-14T17:46:34Z")
I’m opening myself up for abuse here, but… I thought that Peter Jackson did a good thing by having the Elves show up to bolster the defenses at Helm’s Deep in _The Two Towers_. When I read the books it didn’t make sense to me that the humans were doing all the fighting in the major battles - the elves and dwarves should have been in Rohan and Gondor helping hold back the forces of Mordor. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2004, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/3 "2004-07-14T17:55:51Z")
**Kilt-wearin’ Man** , the Elves did send help in the book, including Elrond’s sons Ellodan and Elrohir. The reason they (and they dwarves) didn’t send more help is that they were fighting their own battles elsewhere. But back to the OP, _Apocalypse Now_ did an excellent job of capturing the spirit of _Heart of Darkness_, despite the radical change in setting and plot. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2004, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/4 "2004-07-14T18:17:51Z")
Baz Luhrman’s **Romeo + Juliet** did what most people would say was impossible: improving on Shakespeare. Now, I know the style was controversial and a lot of people hated it, but that’s not what I’m talking about. What was remarkable was the death scene. In the play, Romeo takes the poison, dies, and a few minutes later Juliet wakes up and finds him dead. In the movie, Romeo takes the poison, but Juliet wakes _before_ he dies. Romeo realizes his mistake, but it’s too late. Rewriting of the scene this way adds poignancy and makes it all the more powerful. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2004, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/5 "2004-07-14T19:19:37Z")
Well, to me the classic example is **Goldfinger** in Ian Fleming’s book, the plot isn’t feasible. Bond points this out in the movie version, whereupon Goldfinger reveals his _real_ plan. I also liked the TV movie adaptation of Mark Twain’s **Pudd’nhead Wilson** , starring Ken Howard. A significant deviation from the book, but still good and in character. I’ll forgive it. All movies change the book, at least a little. Lord of the Rings, Day of the Jackal, Gone with the Wind all did good jobs of it. An awful lot of others didn’t. ---
**Author:** ![gonzoron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a6a055/32.png) [@gonzoron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzoron)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2004, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/6 "2004-07-14T19:46:21Z")
The ending of **Fight Club** is significantly better in the movie than in the book. ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2004, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/7 "2004-07-14T19:54:34Z")
**Flowers in the Attic**. The book sucked ass, but the movie was quite watchable. Besides, most stories are improved with the addition of Kristy Swanson. ---
**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:** [July 14, 2004, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/8 "2004-07-14T19:56:26Z")
Hal Ashby’s film of **The Last Detail** improved on the book in numerous ways. ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2004, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/9 "2004-07-14T19:58:22Z")
I think the improvements to the replicants in **Blade Runner** compared to the fairly childlike ones depicted in **Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?** made them much more effective characters; however, a great deal of the back-story was never explained in the movie, which kind of balanced that out. ---
**Author:** ![Abbie\_Carmichael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/49beb7/32.png) [@Abbie\_Carmichael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Abbie_Carmichael)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2004, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/10 "2004-07-14T22:58:03Z")
If **Forrest Gump** had been made by the book, it would have been as big of a piece of crap as “The Runaway Jury” turned out to be. ---
**Author:** ![Agrippina](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8797f3/32.png) [@Agrippina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Agrippina)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2004, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/11 "2004-07-15T00:34:38Z")
I read the book **The Godfather** after watching the movie. After I was done, I was glad they removed the whole Johnny Fontaine plotline, as well as the Lucy Mancini plotline from the movie. ---
**Author:** ![HubZilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ccd318/32.png) [@HubZilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HubZilla)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2004, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/12 "2004-07-15T00:56:55Z")
> [@Kilt-wearin' man](#): > > I’m opening myself up for abuse here, but… > > I thought that Peter Jackson did a good thing by having the Elves show up to bolster the defenses at Helm’s Deep in _The Two Towers_. When I read the books it didn’t make sense to me that the humans were doing all the fighting in the major battles - the elves and dwarves should have been in Rohan and Gondor helping hold back the forces of Mordor. Actually, there are quite a few things I liked from the movie that were changed from the book: FOTR: No Tom Bombadil No song and dance routine for Frodo in the Prancing Pony Arwen giving Aragorn the Evenstar instead of Galadriel Narsil not reforged until ROTK (and Aragorn not carrying a broken sword) Boromir more sympathetic/heroic (like teaching the hobbits swordfighting) TTT: Elves at Helms Deep Refugees at Helms Deep ROTK: Fighting in the streets of Minas Tirith. Sam not wearing the ring in Mordor Of course, there are many, many more things I wish PJ didn’t change/omit, but I’m still waiting for the extended ROTK. ---
**Author:** ![KGS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/90ced4/32.png) [@KGS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KGS)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2004, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/13 "2004-07-15T01:10:58Z")
> [@tdn](#): > > **Flowers in the Attic**. The book sucked ass, but the movie was quite watchable. Oh, my. That movie sucked a royal turd, so I shudder to think just how awful the book must be! _The Man Without a Face_ made a major change to the ending, which was clearly done because of what’s considered “acceptable” in American films these days, but I actually thought the change was an improvement. Guess I’d better spoiler-tag the specifics… Book ending: The boy and the teacher have sex, nobody finds out about it, and the teacher skips town for no apparent reason (though not before leaving a heart-felt note behind.) Movie ending: No sex, the relationship is entirely platonic…but the teacher’s accused of having improprieties with the kid anyway, and gets run out of town (though not before leaving a heart-felt note behind.) I should also point out that the boy was a lot younger in the movie, 12 instead of 15 (I think) – still, the book ending would not have played well in American theaters. (It would’ve been a big hit in Europe, though!) ---
**Author:** ![RikWriter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/49beb7/32.png) [@RikWriter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RikWriter)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2004, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/14 "2004-07-15T01:35:07Z")
There is the oft-cited example of Jaws…leaving out the abortive affair between Matt Hooper and Ellen Brody was a good decision. So was changing the ending and having Chief Brody kill the shark. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2004, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/15 "2004-07-15T02:52:38Z")
The Ted Danson/Mary Steenburgen version of **Gulliver’s Travels** gave Gulliver a backstory (it’s about how he comes back and how his wife deals with it) that allowed them to tie together all the separate episodes and keep it true to Swift. Woody Allen’s **All you Wanted to Know about Sex, but were Afraid to Ask** takes just the title of the book as a jumping off point for a bunch of skits. It was the only way to film the book, and the movie was probably more accurate about sex than the book was. Hitchcock redid the novel that he made into **Vertigo** , which was basically just an excuse for a twist ending. The movie put the twist in the middle. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_Wright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@Steve\_Wright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_Wright)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2004, 11:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/16 "2004-07-15T11:10:57Z")
Hitchcock also took Patricia Highsmith’s _Strangers on a Train_ (serious downer of a book, all about the destructive effects of guilt) and turned it into a slick thriller with a happy ending.In the book, what’s-his-name - the protagonist - actually _goes along_ with the psychopath’s plan, and _does_ commit a murder for him in returnI think, on balance, it’s an improvement - Highsmith’s _Strangers on a Train_ is a good book (if depressing), but Hitchcock’s version is a _damn_ good film … ---
**Author:** ![FriarTed](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/friarted/32/1052_2.png) [@FriarTed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriarTed)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2004, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/17 "2004-07-15T16:42:39Z")
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (Branaugh, DeNiro), which I thought was the most faithful big budget version (I vaguely recall a European production called Terror of Frankenstein aka Victor Frankenstein)- the scene merging Elizabeth’s murder & the Bride’s creation, with a living (the book had him killed long before this) Clerval being the horrified witness. Mary would have been proud of that scene. BEING THERE, novel & screenplay both by Jerzy Kosinski (sp?), bood ends with Chance lying among the plants, as non-sentient as they are; movie ends with a metaphysical/MindScience/Christ-type scene. ---
**Author:** ![Kizarvexius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/da6949/32.png) [@Kizarvexius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kizarvexius)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2004, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/18 "2004-07-15T16:50:55Z")
Some of the best parts of _The Shawshank Redemption_ were not in the Stephen King novella. The Mozart scene, for example. ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2004, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/19 "2004-07-15T19:49:15Z")
The third act of Nick Hornsby’s _About a Boy_ differed sharply in the movie version but for understandable reasons and it worked. In the book the final third revolves around an actual event from 1994, the suicide of Kurt Cobain and Ellie’s overreaction to same and while both sad and hysterically funny, it would forever consign the piece to that year. The movie ending, featuring Marcus & Will in the talent show wasn’t in the book at all but was faithful to the change in both the boy and the man (and still funny and sweet). The recent remake of _Salem’s Lot_, while ultimately unnecessary, diverged from the book by being set in the age of the Internet and cell-phone and had a few touches that were non-biblical but effective. While overall I preferred the book, the ending of the movie _Contact_ made much more sense than the original ending. In the movie, Ellie goes alone into the pod/wormhole and thus it’s more conceivable that her story would not be believed while in the book five people, all super-respected individuals in their fields, go into the pod/wormhole, have the same experience, and are still doubted when they emerge. The movie also omits some endings from the book re: Ellie’s parents that really didn’t greatly aid the story. The most debated “for better or for worse” movie ending was probably _Hannibal_, with many people much preferring the book ending (yum yum) and many others preferring the movie’s much tamer ending. ---
**Author:** ![Agrippina](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8797f3/32.png) [@Agrippina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Agrippina)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2004, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100/20 "2004-07-15T20:35:12Z")
> [@Sampiro](#): > > The most debated “for better or for worse” movie ending was probably _Hannibal_, with many people much preferring the book ending (yum yum) and many others preferring the movie’s much tamer ending. I’m glad they changed the ending to _Silence of the Lambs_, though. In the book: I found it rather boring. Clarice takes up that date with the weird bug guy from the museum, and she’s happy after sleeping with him In the movie, of course Clarice gets a call during her celebration for receiving her award. It’s Lecter, and he’s chasing down Chilton. “I’m having an old friend for dinner”. Although I’ve read that in the original screenplay, the last scene had Chilton tied up in his office about to be tortured by Lecter [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/movies-that-diverged-from-the-novel-but-in-a-good-way/255100.md?page=2)