Current Events > Movie or TV adaptations that are better than the books they're based on?

(+) Yeah! (+)

*I would prefer if we could mostly set aside the LoTR series in this topic, but do what you will*

*please mark your spoilers*

In general, I think (good) books are better than their film adaptations, because there's just so much more depth to books. Characters, settings, dialogue, plots and sub-plots and histories. Books naturally have the potential to develop all of these much more than a movie or tv series.

What are some movies or shows that you think were superior to their source material?

I watched the 1990 and 2017 versions of It yesterday, and while I liked the 2017 one, I easily give the edge to the book (keeping in mind it's only half the story).

Gone Girl was a pretty darn good movie and did as good of a job of capturing details of the book as any movie I can think of, but still left out some of the most fascinating twists and turns.
---

Life of Pi
The beginning of the book is boring as shit. The movie does a great job of glossing over it very quickly and the rest is very faithful to the book.
---

Lord of the Rings takes this one hands down. The movies are great, the books were flat out painful to read. Tolkien spends three quarters of a page on the battle of helm's deep, but we get 3 pages describing trees. Borderline unreadable.
---

Watchmen.

Don't get me wrong, there's a lot of great stuff from the graphic novel that they missed, but the ending was so much better in the film. Made much more sense, felt more fitting with the tone of the story.
---

The Godfather is the most obvious.
---

Twilight.
---

au_gold posted...

Twilight.

---

Twilight? Really?

I actually read the first 3 books way back in the day, but never saw a movie.

What about the Hunger Games series? I read those books back then too (you can do a lot of reading when you work overnight and get a few breaks), but never saw any movies.
---

I mean, the Twilight movies weren't really anything to call home about, but I did like the cinematography and the soundtracks a lot. The color palette was really appropriate. They were actually pretty solid movies, just the source material was kind of weak.
---

Serious Cat posted...

The Godfather is the most obvious.

---

SRR Capdown posted...

Watchmen.

*sigh* Okay, I'm gonna let this one slide so long as he doesn't cite the gimped movie ending as the primary reas...

Don't get me wrong, there's a lot of great stuff from the graphic novel that they missed, but the ending was so much better in the film. Made much more sense, felt more fitting with the tone of the story.

smgdmfh
---

SideshowBob311 posted...

Lord of the Rings takes this one hands down. The movies are great, the books were flat out painful to read. Tolkien spends three quarters of a page on the battle of helm's deep, but we get 3 pages describing trees. Borderline unreadable.

Yea I remember reading a few pages describing the ents when pippin and the other hobbit first meet them. Almost stopped reading after that.
---

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
---

game of thrones the fanservice season
1. the show moved past the books.
2. the show gave us answers and scenes we all wanted or didnt know we wanted.

finally got dune tv series and children of dune on bluray. need to watch these first to determine of better than the books though. I am on dune messiah at this time...
---

Maybe not "better" but the film adaptation of Coraline was way better than I was expecting it to be.
---

Frankenstein (1931)

HBOSS posted...

game of thrones the fanservice season

season 7? you gotta be fucking kidding me
---

Butterfiles posted...

HBOSS posted...

game of thrones the fanservice season

season 7? you gotta be fucking kidding me

what's wrong with that

you couldn't see how deep it was, completely omitting any nuance or character development and focusing solely on action and becoming generic fantasy?
---

Jurassic Park Lost World - book was rather meh, at least the movie ramped up the odds

SideshowBob311 posted...

Lord of the Rings takes this one hands down. The movies are great, the books were flat out painful to read. Tolkien spends three quarters of a page on the battle of helm's deep, but we get 3 pages describing trees. Borderline unreadable.

Just die.
---

Dr_Agon posted...

SideshowBob311 posted...

Lord of the Rings takes this one hands down. The movies are great, the books were flat out painful to read. Tolkien spends three quarters of a page on the battle of helm's deep, but we get 3 pages describing trees. Borderline unreadable.

Just die.

Tolkien was a masterful worldbuilder, The same cannot be said for his storytelling. His pacing was absolutely dreadful at times. The journey leading up to the battle at Helm's Deep was more exciting than the battle itself. That's a problem.
---

Forrest Gump. The book was dumb.

I didn't really enjoy reading The Wizard of Oz. I like the movie better.
---

Possibly The Shawshank Redemption.
---

LinksLiege posted...

Dr_Agon posted...

SideshowBob311 posted...

Lord of the Rings takes this one hands down. The movies are great, the books were flat out painful to read. Tolkien spends three quarters of a page on the battle of helm's deep, but we get 3 pages describing trees. Borderline unreadable.

Just die.

Tolkien was a masterful worldbuilder, The same cannot be said for his storytelling. His pacing was absolutely dreadful at times. The journey leading up to the battle at Helm's Deep was more exciting than the battle itself. That's a problem.

Lol see this is why I wanted to leave LOTR out of it.

I really like Fellowship of the Ring as a book, and as a movie. I haven't yet read Two Towers or Return of the King, got sidetracked... two years ago... but I've heard these complaints maaaany times.
---

Fight Club.
---

dirtycommunist posted...

I really like Fellowship of the Ring as a book, and as a movie. I haven't yet read Two Towers or Return of the King, got sidetracked... two years ago... but I've heard these complaints maaaany times.

The series is a worthwhile read for anyone who wants to see what it looks like when someone puts world building first. He gets you to see exactly what he wants you to see, but...well, you've read the first book, so you might remember how the council of Elrond part (where they're talking about what to do with the One Ring) contains like 50+ pages of Gandalf explaining the history of the Ring. That's a good warning of what to expect.

He makes some other questionable choices too, like the final part of the story after the Ring is destroyed where they deal with the Shire being taken over by Saruman, who's been demoted from demigod-of-sorts to petty fuckwit. That was just silly.
---

Jaws.
---

Serious Cat posted...

The Godfather is the most obvious.

What, you didn't like the subplot about the girl with the cavernous vagina?
---

GATTJT posted...

Serious Cat posted...

The Godfather is the most obvious.

What, you didn't like the subplot about the girl with the cavernous vagina?

brb reading The Godfather
---

masterpug53 posted...

SRR Capdown posted...

Watchmen.

*sigh* Okay, I'm gonna let this one slide so long as he doesn't cite the gimped movie ending as the primary reas...

Don't get me wrong, there's a lot of great stuff from the graphic novel that they missed, but the ending was so much better in the film. Made much more sense, felt more fitting with the tone of the story.

smgdmfh

No, he is right. For a world where Dr. Manhattan was the only supernatural entity, dropping a giant space squid in the middle of New York was really out of place.
---

LinksLiege posted...

dirtycommunist posted...

I really like Fellowship of the Ring as a book, and as a movie. I haven't yet read Two Towers or Return of the King, got sidetracked... two years ago... but I've heard these complaints maaaany times.

The series is a worthwhile read for anyone who wants to see what it looks like when someone puts world building first. He gets you to see exactly what he wants you to see, but...well, you've read the first book, so you might remember how the council of Elrond part (where they're talking about what to do with the One Ring) contains like 50+ pages of Gandalf explaining the history of the Ring. That's a good warning of what to expect.

He makes some other questionable choices too, like the final part of the story after the Ring is destroyed where they deal with the Shire being taken over by Saruman, who's been demoted from demigod-of-sorts to petty fuckwit. That was just silly.

No it made sense. The Scouring of the Shire was set up pretty early. And it did a great job of showing just how pathetic Saruman had become. It's completely understandable why it wasn't used in the films though.

I think both the books and films are equal. There are certain moments that one does better than the other. Helm's Deep was one mentioned already. Helm's Deep in the movie is one of the most iconic and entertaining parts. It's a pretty dull chapter in the book though.
---

Would it technically be correct to say Atlas Shrugged, merely because of the fact that it doesn't take a month to "read" through?
---

Serious Cat posted...

The Godfather is the most obvious.

Nah, fam. I'll allow you to have your own opinion, but the book actually makes a coherent plot, while the movie is just a bunch of random stuff that happens/kinda happens.

As for better?

I gotta give No Country For Old Men some love. Maybe it's because I saw the movie first, but the book was nothing special. The movie captured the tone so well. I loved the bleak/no soundtrack feel it had.
---

Lord of the Rings
Watchmen
Game of Thrones
Luke Cage
Avengers (1st and 3rd movies)
Captain America (All 3 movies)
Batman v Superman (Dark Knight Returns/Death of Superman)
---

Eat More Beef posted...

Serious Cat posted...

The Godfather is the most obvious.

Nah, fam. I'll allow you to have your own opinion, but the book actually makes a coherent plot, while the movie is just a bunch of random stuff that happens/kinda happens.

As for better?

I gotta give No Country For Old Men some love. Maybe it's because I saw the movie first, but the book was nothing special. The movie captured the tone so well. I loved the bleak/no soundtrack feel it had.

Coherent Sonny pen0r maybe.

loafy013 posted...

masterpug53 posted...

SRR Capdown posted...

Watchmen.

*sigh* Okay, I'm gonna let this one slide so long as he doesn't cite the gimped movie ending as the primary reas...

Don't get me wrong, there's a lot of great stuff from the graphic novel that they missed, but the ending was so much better in the film. Made much more sense, felt more fitting with the tone of the story.

smgdmfh

No, he is right. For a world where Dr. Manhattan was the only supernatural entity, dropping a giant space squid in the middle of New York was really out of place.

No, he isn't. I've never respected this opinion and I honestly get tired of hearing it trotted out. Especially when it's propagated by a person who also believes that a mediocre film adaptation is of overall higher quality than one of the most acclaimed graphic novels of all time.
---

unclekoolaid73 posted...

Fight Club.

Even the author thinks the movie is better.
---