I’m sure this has been done before, but I haven’t seen it. I’d nominate The Talented Mr. Ripley as a far better movie than book (I found the book almost unreadable), same with Stephen King’s Carrie, and last but not least, Primal Fear from the William Diehl book by the same name.
Got any more?
LA Confidential. The book is a fun read if the movie leaves you wanting more; but, I feel that the book goes a bit too far out there.
What the hell is a book?
I’d say fight club. I don’t really get the appeal of Palahniuk’s books, but the movie was much better. Then again I only read 2 of them, and one was fight club.
American psycho the film was also better than the book.
I liked *Field of Dreams *better than the book it was based on. I have never read the book, but I believe The Godfather may be the best example of this.
I liked Bram Stoker’s Dracula better than Bram Stoker’s Dracula.
The Princess Bride
Blade Runner
The Neverending Story
Alice Adams
To Kill A Mockingbird
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest
Those last three? Hard to choose; both books and movies were amazing.
V for Vendetta was definitely better than the comic it’s based on. Couldn’t get into the comic at all.
Jaws is my standard in this regard. A crap book but a great movie.
Some would say The Godfather, but the book is nowhere near as bad as Jaws.
2001: A Space Odyssey (though the book handled Hal’s death better)
If we’re including graphic novels, a history of violence had a much better story in the movie than the comic.
Who Framed Roger Rabbit
The Harry Potter films – Ms. Rowling is a great storyteller, but her prose is unbearable, even for children’s literature.
Also, there are some very enjoyable adaptations of James Patterson novels. I would sooner nail my soft bits to a tree than suffer through one of his novels, but a “based on a novel by…” credit of his on a film is actually a selling point for me. Go figure.
This has got to be a joke.
The real answer is Fight Club.
2nd vote for Bladerunner (book was Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?) Even the book title is boring. There was something about a turtle in it.
The Devil Wears Prada - The book is poorly written, while the movie has Meryl Streep in good form
No Country for Old Men - Not because the book was bad, but because the movie is a masterpiece. The Coen brothers took a good story and brought it to another level.
The Warriors, yeah I know it was a crappy cheesy 80’s flick but the book was a total abortion
Goldfinger. In the book, the plan is to actually steal the gold from Fort Knox. The idea of detonating an atomic bomb, and thereby increasing the value of Goldfinger’s own holdings, is new to the movie. The scene where he reveals his plan to Bond is excellent, as though he’s finally found someone who can appreciate how truly clever he is. (I disagree with it slightly from a character perspective, but it is a clever idea.) The description of how Bond winds up in Goldfinger’s company, and goes along on the raid, is also a bit more clumsy in the book, if I remember correctly.
CalMeacham will be along shortly to agree with me.
You mean Who Censored Roger Rabbit … I have the book and really wish the movie was closer to the book plot.
**Carrie **was Stephen King’s first big novel and really isn’t a very good book. I’d say it’s probably his worst.
De Palma’s movie, on the other hand, is fantastic.
‘LOTR: The Fellowship of the Ring’ was better as a film than a book IMO. Mainly because they had to cut a lot of the chuff that was completely irrelevant to the story, such as Tom Bombadil.