Right?
It’s one of those sayings that you hear ALL THE TIME. The book was better than the movie adaptation. And probably more than 90 percent of the time it is. Because it’s the original and it’s difficult to match the original in any medium.
I’m here to ask if you’ve ever thought otherwise. I’ve written before on here that I hold the movie adaptation of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (the original) in much higher regard than the book. I just about hated the book. But I’m not sure if I can really think of another movie that really surpassed the book in its brilliance. There may be a few out there, but I’m not thinking of any.
Perhaps the original Jurassic Park movie comes very close to matching the first book. Perhaps. Or maybe the LOTR movies? Though I haven’t read all the books
Can you think of any movies adapted from books that actually came out better?
Johnny Reads 
I loved the book “To Kill a Mockingbird” but I thought the movie was better than the book because it retained the good plot points and essence of the book but it removed the excess things that were good in the book but necessarily for a movie. I also felt the same about “The Green Mile”, “Gone With the Wind” movies as well in that the movies were superior to the books.
LikeLike
You’re going to think I’m crazy. I’ve only read To Kill a Mockingbird. Great, great book. But I haven’t read the others or seen the movies. 😕
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh if you ever get the chance to read the books or see the movies or both, you will enjoy either one. I think the most disappointing book adaptation was “The Shining” by Stephen King. The original movie with Jack Nicholson was HORRIBLE compared to the book and even Stephen King did not like the movie. The movie was all about Nicholson’s character, whereas the main character in the book, the little boy, was shoved to a supporting role in the movie. Blecchhh lol!
LikeLike
Lord of the rings maybe? to be honest, I found the books so difficult to read, so the movie was more engaging I guess.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I only read parts of the first book. I didn’t enjoy it at all.
LikeLike
I agree with this. Tolkien used such rich and descriptive language that it became overwhelming. It was nice to actually get to see what he was talking about.
LikeLike
I’ve really enjoyed watching Harry Potter movies, LOTR, Hobbit movies (even if they REALLY dragged the plot), Jurassic Park and all of the Jurassic Park movies are fantastic
LikeLike
My only disagreement is The Hobbit movies and the second and third Jurassic Park movies. All so poorly done in my eyes. The others were nothing short of great.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Movies can be great at pulling out the essence of a story, the great rattling plot that might be encumbered by too many subplots and overblown language or description – such as with LOTR.
I haven’t read it myself (so I guess this is a bit of a cheat) but my other half read Jaws by Peter Benchley, the book Spielberg based the film on and he said it was rubbish – much improved on the screen.
LikeLike
Yep. They can be. And then they can also completely ruin a story that works well through the written word and not so well on screen.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very true. Often become cropped, drop interesting subplots and voice – or you just lose the style which was so attractive in the prose. Yes, not all books should be adapted for the screen
LikeLike
But when they sell well they HAVE to be adapted.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ha! Very true. Even some of those originally deeemed ‘unfilmable’ – Life of Pi for instance. Not necessarily a bad thing for author earnings, though
LikeLike
Of course not. But authors making money from movies isn’t and shouldn’t be the priority. I’d like studios to focus on making good movies. Adaptation or not.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Absolutely! It seems these days, though that studios are too scared to invest in something completely original – it all has to be adaptations, remakes, reboots, reimaginings. Not always a bad thing – but it does mean we tend to get a lot more of anything that’s been successful. Super hero movies, for example
LikeLike
Do not get me started on super hero movies. 😡
LikeLiked by 1 person
Haha!I’m pretty tired of them, I must admit, especially now the studios have used the best ones and are scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to find heroes which haven’t been used yet – Ant Man, anyone?
LikeLike
Most aren’t even good movies. Like the Wolverine ones. Why does he have so many!? I haven’t seen any recent ones.
LikeLiked by 1 person
True. I try not to watch them, but have an eleven year old who wants to be Iron Man, so … And the Wolverines were rubbish, you’re right. Until people stop watching them in their millions, the studios will keep making them
LikeLike
I actually like Iron Man a bit more than just about any other one. Mostly because of Robert Downey Jr. Maybe once Disney gets through its next phase people will be fed up with them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed – Iron Man has a twinkle in his eye. He’s very cool, thanks to Robert Downey Jr. We have to run out of superheroes one day – surely?
LikeLike
One day. I hope. But I had a conversation earlier with some coworkers and they were just naming superhero after superhero who is being made into film. Ugh.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Really? You mean there are more? They can’t be much good though, if it’s taken so long to make a film based on them. Maybe the market will be so flooded with superhero films, people will finally O.D on them. Or maybe, they’ll sink so far into the culture, it will be nigh on impossible to get any other kind of film made in Hollywood …
LikeLike
Hahaha nooooo! A box office of ONLY superhero films would be cruel. Whether they’re good or not.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, it sounds like a mightmarish world to me. Though I’m sure my son would be very happy about it 🙂
LikeLike
Nope. He’d grow tired of it and wish all the movies away.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Either that or actually try to be Iron Man when he grows up …
LikeLike
Welllll that would be interesting.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Devil Wears Prada’s my go-to example for this. The script cleaned up all sorts of problems the book had. I agree on LOTR, too… Tolkien got carried away with the mythology aspect, not surprising given his background, so those books barely read like novels for me.
LikeLike
Is The Devil Wears Prada the one with Anne Hathaway and Meryl Streep? I think? Could be way off. I somehow know that they’re in it (maybe) but I have no idea what it’s about. Maybe fashion. I only read parts of the first LOTR book. Had no interest after that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes… You don’t need an interest in fashion to enjoy the movie. (Honestly, though, I don’t know what interests you would need to enjoy the book… Too many holes in it!) I made it through all of the LOTR books in middle school, didn’t enjoy them, then tried listening to the audio of the first one as an adult and remembered why I didn’t enjoy them!
LikeLike
Ha! Oh geez. Hahaha! 😂
LikeLike
The Hunger Games. And the Harry Potter series. Have to respectfully disagree about LOTR, given I’ve read the books about twenty times, and as for the Hobbit movie(s) – well, the first one was barely ok and the last two dreadful. And I’m fence-sitting on Game of Thrones…but I’m leaning towards the series as being better than the books.
LikeLike
Whoa. You think The Hunger Games and Harry Potter movies were better than the books!? Nope. Disagree there. I stopped watching The Hobbit movies after the first was a train wreck. Haven’t watched it read Game of Thrones.
LikeLike
I feel guilty for saying this because I LOVE Neil Gaiman, but I liked the film adaptation of Stardust far more than the book.
LikeLike
He’s an author I haven’t read. But one I hear talked about quite a bit.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If you ever want to try him I recommend American Gods. It’s brilliant!
LikeLike
That’s the one I’ve been told to read. Several times. Hmm.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jurassic Park, LOTR, and Willy Wonka are good examples. I would throw in The Maze Runner as one that immediately comes to my mind. As does Sex and The City – which actually was a book before it was a show!
Then you have movies that are equally good as the book, like Gone Girl, or The Princess Bride. Honestly, there are a LOT of classic movies based on books that I have never picked up, so I can’t give an informed opinion about some of them (like whether or not The Wizard of Oz was a better movie or a book. It is a super classic movie, but that doesn’t mean the book was bad, you know?)
LikeLike
Hmmm. I haven’t seen any of the others you mentioned. Or read them. Well, except for Oz. Maybe I’m not watching as many adaptations as I thought. Whoops.
LikeLike
I think Children of Men is like that. I liked the movie more than the book. Although both showed the bleakness of the apocalyptic world in their own way, the movie was more intense somehow (which doesn’t happen often). To a certain extent, I could also say the same thing for Star Dust. It’s not that I didn’t like the book, it’s just that the movie draws me to watch it over and over again, but the book doesn’t.
LikeLike
I wish I knew one of those so I could tell you what I think of them. But I don’t. 😳
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, if you ever want to watch a light-hearted fantasy movie with a strong cast of actors, a movie that will lift your spirit, and is meant for the whole family, then try Stardust. It’s based on Neil Gaiman’s novel. If on the other hand you prefer darker, grittier, apocalyptic sceneries, then The Children of Men is a good choice. It’s based on P.D. James’ novel. I recomment both movies (and books, obviously for the comparison).
LikeLike
Hmm. Gotcha.
LikeLike