1. Lance Schukies
    Offline

    Lance Schukies Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2015
    Messages:
    178
    Likes Received:
    39

    the book is always better

    Discussion in 'Entertainment' started by Lance Schukies, May 31, 2015.

    enjoy


    imgur.com/a/m0tge
     
  2. Komposten
    Offline

    Komposten Insanitary pile of rotten fruit Staff Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,580
    Likes Received:
    667
    Location:
    Sweden
    Ah! :bigeek:
    Why do we have so many weird plugins I don't know about? :confused:
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2015
  3. Lemex
    Offline

    Lemex That's Lord Lemex to you. Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    10,507
    Likes Received:
    3,151
    Location:
    Northeast England
    Not always.
     
  4. JessAlways
    Offline

    JessAlways Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2015
    Messages:
    77
    Likes Received:
    25
    The book does tend to be better. In the cases of Unbroken, Harry Potter and Hunger Games, and Lord of the Rings.
    The books were just incredible. The movies were great, and I love them, but it's so fun reading through the books!
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2015
  5. peachalulu
    Offline

    peachalulu Contributing Member Reviewer Contributor

    Joined:
    May 20, 2012
    Messages:
    3,828
    Likes Received:
    2,382
    Location:
    occasionally Oz , mainly Canada
    I thought Gone with the Wind did a nice job of streamlining things - A lot of people don't know that Scarlett O'Hara had a boy ( Wade ) other than just the fateful 'Bonnie Blue.'

    I didn't bother watching Harriet the Spy - I just couldn't see Rosie O'Donnell as Ole Golly.
    And a movie I thought was better than the book was The Night Digger with Patricia Neal. A creepy old 70's thriller ( Roald Dahl did the screenplay ) the book Nest in a Falling Tree wasn't nearly as good.
     
  6. The Smoked Word
    Offline

    The Smoked Word New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2015
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    The main thing I always dislike about books made into films are that they dismiss some really really fun stuff. Mainly this is replaced with romance or the like. or the ending in the LOTR books. I watched the films before I read the book. And after reading the book I couldn't understand why they didn't implement the ending of the books in the films. Trying to say it without spoiling, so sorry if it's unclear :).
     
    JessAlways likes this.
  7. JessAlways
    Offline

    JessAlways Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2015
    Messages:
    77
    Likes Received:
    25
    Well said!
     
  8. nrextakemi
    Offline

    nrextakemi Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2015
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Confirmed
    Most Light Novels are garbage, but the anime adaptations are great.
     
  9. kfmiller
    Offline

    kfmiller Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2015
    Messages:
    187
    Likes Received:
    108
    Location:
    Cincinnati, OH
    My biggest exception is Jaws. I thought the movie blew the book out of the water.
     
  10. Selbbin
    Offline

    Selbbin I hate you Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    3,238
    Likes Received:
    1,806
    Location:
    Australia
    Fuck off the book is always better. They're different. The mediums have strengths and weaknesses. Books can do what movies can't, and movies can do what books can't.

    Fight Club the movie is far better than the book. The Beach movie is far better than the book. Then there's Die Hard (Nothing Lasts Forever), Blade Runner (Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep), Shrek, The Shining, The Book Thief (mainly because that book is garbage), The Princess Bride, Minority Report, The Godfather, Schindler's List, Master and Commander, 2001, Full Metal Jacket (The Short-timers), Reqiuem for a Dream (even though the book is good, the movie is outstanding), To Kill a Mockingbird (again, a fine book but a magical movie), We need to Talk about Kevin, ... I could go on.
     
    Mike Hill likes this.
  11. Stacy C
    Offline

    Stacy C Banned

    Joined:
    May 3, 2015
    Messages:
    272
    Likes Received:
    127
    Location:
    Out Of Sight, Out Of Mind
    Me, too, but then Jaws is my all-time favorite movie.
     
  12. Lemex
    Offline

    Lemex That's Lord Lemex to you. Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    10,507
    Likes Received:
    3,151
    Location:
    Northeast England
    Add Trainspotting to that. I love (adore) the film, yet I'm not to be honest a huge fan of the book.
     
  13. Mike Hill
    Offline

    Mike Hill Natural born citizen of republic of Finland.

    Joined:
    May 12, 2014
    Messages:
    260
    Likes Received:
    70
    Location:
    Finland
    Twilight the book is unreadable. Movie was awful but better. Book was also much creepier.
     
  14. Lea`Brooks
    Offline

    Lea`Brooks Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    May 11, 2013
    Messages:
    2,623
    Likes Received:
    1,718
    Location:
    Virginia, United States
    The Percy Jackson book/movie is an example of being different. The books were great. But the movie is 100% different. If I hadn't been such a big fan of the books, I might have actually enjoyed the movies. They weren't bad movies. Just different.

    But... I may never say this about another book again, but the Divergent movie was waaayy better than the book. They changed some things in the movie that I think made it so much better. For example, in the book, Tris knows she can trick her training simulation, so she does. I can't remember why exactly. But in the movie, she's not SUPPOSED to trick the simulations because it'll make her stand out as Divergent. Four teaches her how a Dauntless would do it, so she'd look Dauntless and not Divergent. The way the movie handled it makes way more sense than the way the book handled it.

    On another note.. The movie lost it's appeal after I watched Insurgent. It was just... bad. lol
     
  15. daveydwb
    Offline

    daveydwb New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2015
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Tacoma, WA
    What about Jurassic Park? Both the book and the movie are outstanding, but I'd have to say the movie is slightly better. Not by much, but still.
     
    Simpson17866 likes this.
  16. Sack-a-Doo!
    Offline

    Sack-a-Doo! Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2015
    Messages:
    2,231
    Likes Received:
    1,511
    Location:
    [unspecified]
    Whenever possible, I see the movie first and then read the book. Makes both far more enjoyable.
     
  17. Selbbin
    Offline

    Selbbin I hate you Contributor

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    3,238
    Likes Received:
    1,806
    Location:
    Australia
    Because movies can cue emotional responses in a way books never can, by using music. And what film is more famous for it's suspense building music!
     
  18. Quixote's Biographer
    Offline

    Quixote's Biographer Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2015
    Messages:
    99
    Likes Received:
    86
    Some popular film theorists would argue that there can only be one good and one bad version of any story. If the film is great, the book is probably not a classic and if the book is great, the movie version is often not worth watching. A often used example of this is Moby Dick, classic book, but no one has ever made a successful movie adaptation. The point is that a story usually only fits one medium.

    When a book and the movie adaptation are both good, it's usually because the movie has been changed a lot. I.e. Stephen King's vs Stanley Kubrick's version of The Shining - great book, great film, but that's mainly because Kubrick in the adaptation process changed the story to fit his medium. What he produced was something that was so different from King's book that King didn't want him to publish it.
     
    Ivana and Lea`Brooks like this.
  19. Sack-a-Doo!
    Offline

    Sack-a-Doo! Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2015
    Messages:
    2,231
    Likes Received:
    1,511
    Location:
    [unspecified]
    How does Harry Potter fit into your theory?
     
    Simpson17866 likes this.
  20. Quixote's Biographer
    Offline

    Quixote's Biographer Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2015
    Messages:
    99
    Likes Received:
    86
    That depends. Are you saying that either the books or the movies are great/bad?
     
  21. Sack-a-Doo!
    Offline

    Sack-a-Doo! Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2015
    Messages:
    2,231
    Likes Received:
    1,511
    Location:
    [unspecified]
    They aren't to my taste, so I won't render an opinion.

    My point is that just about everyone who likes Harry Potter in one form also likes him in the other. It makes me wonder what those popular film theorists would say. Perhaps it's the exception that proves the rule?
     
  22. Quixote's Biographer
    Offline

    Quixote's Biographer Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2015
    Messages:
    99
    Likes Received:
    86
    I think most rules have exceptions and Harry Potter might be one of them, absolutely. But even though I've read all the books and seen all the movies I wouldn't say either is great (Daniel Radcliffe in particular is atrocious the older he gets..). So, neither being great, you could perhaps say that Harry Potter doesn't 'qualify' for the theory. But in all honesty, I haven't studied adaptations in depth, I only happened to read an article about it in the film theorist's 'Holy Bible' (Also know as "Film Theory and Criticism" by editors Braudy and Cohen if you're interested).

    Technically I didn't say it was MY theory either :)
     
  23. Steerpike
    Online

    Steerpike Felis amatus Supporter Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    11,075
    Likes Received:
    5,271
    Location:
    California, US
    I thought John Huston's Moby Dick, with Gregory Peck, was pretty good, though it loses much as compared to the novel.
     
  24. little_writer
    Offline

    little_writer Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2015
    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    The book is always better, because when you read it you imagine everything in your own way. and when you watch a movie after the book, 99% are it will NOT coincide with what you "watched" in your imagination whole reading :)
     
  25. Sack-a-Doo!
    Offline

    Sack-a-Doo! Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2015
    Messages:
    2,231
    Likes Received:
    1,511
    Location:
    [unspecified]
    This is 100% true... unless the book is a novelization. :)
     

Share This Page