Movies you liked better than the book

Cafe Society
1

I have just finished reading an anthology of Stephen King short stories each of which has been made into a movie (1408, Low Men in Yellow Coats, & Rita Hayworth and Shawshank, & Children of the Corn) being the main ones.

I have ot now admit that I actually prefer the movie version of Shawshank Redemption over the short story. I think it is some of the small details which I think the movie carried off better, or tweaked just a little that made them work a bit better IMO.

This is a bit of revelation for me, as I cannot recall a single other instance where I consider the movie adaptation to be without argument better than the book version.

2

I did prefer Shawshank and Stand By Me the films over their short stories, but this is probably partially because I read the stories after viewing the films, and those films are just awesome.

Can’t think of any others though. Usually film adaptations greatly disappoint me because they change too much/leave too much out and if it’s a book I love it means I’ve read it multiple times and every difference or omission stands out to me.

3

I thought the movie of Forrest Gump was better than the book

4

Lord of the Rings

5

The Hunt for Red October didn’t leave out too much from the book. Both are excellent, but the movie doesn’t have Clancy’s endless technical detail.

6

The original Wicker Man. The book is just… kind of lame. I did prefer Cornwall over Scotland, but other than that, the film is better, even after all this time. Especially after the remake.

For a more obscure one, as a kid I loved The Watcher in the Woods, with an elderly Bette Davis. I found the book at the library and it was terrible. Some stupid nonsense about a TV. It was like they’d watched Poltergeist and found that scene creepy, but didn’t get why. (Not actually possible without a time-travelling author.)

7

Fight Club

8

Second on Fight Club.

And, Children of Men. A very good movie. Not great, but very good. But a very mediocre book.

9

The movie To Live and Die in L.A. was far better than the book. Just an amazing film. The action sequences, the double-crosses, the complicated characters, and my favorite car chase scene of all time. In between the Wang Chung soundtrack and the guys who made the movie getting sued by the guys who made Miami Vice, it gets my vote for ultimate 80’s movie ever.

Tracking the book down was actually a chore, and when I did find it, it was shit. Just boring and pointless as all hell. I’ll spoiler it just to follow the rules, but really now, you shouldn’t bother:

Rick Masters lives, gets captured and goes to prison. Richard Chance gets blown away by his snitch, Ruth, Vukovich gets arrested and goes to prison, but is let off easily thanks to the intervention of Jim Hart, who is Vukovich’s friend, not Chance’s (He hates Chance and considers him a corrupt manipulator, which is exactly what Chance is). Oh, and the fucking car chase never even fucking happens!!

I’m serious. The book is a boring piece of shit.

Sharky’s Machine was a gritty cop thriller which was easy to understand but still pretty interesting. The book was a convoluted mess with WWII conspiracies, villains getting killed by giant animatronic dragons, and really weird coincidences. It had its moments, but I liked the movie a lot more.

Rush was another. The movie was poignant and thrilling. The book was autobiographical detailing Kim Wozencraft’s real life investigations and subsequent prison time for violating the civil rights of alleged drug dealers through the false arrests featured in the movie. In the book:

the two cops marry and later divorce after he has an affair

which I found kind of pointless. The whole thing was anticlimactic and kind of dull.

10

That was the one that Iwas going to say. It was a really great movie and I thought the book just really sucked. I couldn’t even finish it.
Fries green tomatoes was a really good book and the movie was good also but I like the movie better,
The bridges of Madison county was a superb movie and the book rates a very good.
The same with The green mile.
Gone with the wind is one of the classic “best” movies ever made. I did not like the book.

11

I totally forgot about Fight Club somehow. I definitely agree the movie was better.

And to jump in with dalej42 I much preferred Patriot Games as a movie. The book was good but I think the movie followed it enough and cut out all the extra crap Clancy adds in.

12

OK, I’ll jump on the bandwagon: Clear and Present Danger was a wayyyy better movie than a book.

Tom Clancy is like Philip K. Dick. They’re great at coming up with stories, but they don’t know how to convey them.

13

the Jane Austen fans out there won’t like this, but I really liked the movie version of Mansfield Park better than the book.

14

The Princess Bride

15

The Phantom of the Opera.

And I second Lord of the Rings.

16

LOTR for me too.

17

The Godfather. The film is a masterpiece, the book not so much ( I never even bothered to read the second one ).

18

God no :stuck_out_tongue:

The movie was mostly good but the ending, having to be a Hollywood action man hero ending made me want to puke.

And Clear and Present Danger? Double no for me. I remember seeing an interview with the director of that POS who specifically said he considered it his mission to get rid of Clancy’s extreme right wing views/writing. :dubious:

For LOTR, I had somehow managed to overlook them. I remember coming to the LOTR book’s late, long after I had read plenty of fantasy by a lot of other authors and I found Tolkien’s pacing extremely slow and tedious. I recall skipping whole pages at times and not really missing anything :smiley:

19

The Godfather for me as well. While I would have liked to see the scene where Apollonia’s assasin get what’s coming to him(it’s in the book, not in the movie), the movie was much better paced, particulary the ending sequence.

The book tends to drag a lot because of the while Johnny Fontaine subplot that takes up an entire section of the book and really doesn’t add much.

Dr. Zhivago isn’t a great movie, but the book was pretty bad. I tried to read it a couple years back and just couldn’t get into it.

20

Be more specific. Particularly as all of the movie versions are different.