Which Movies > Books ?

[Shlup]

Forest Gump, Pride & Prejudice, and... there was one more but Spuuky made me forget it.

Fight Club the movie is on-par with Fight Club the book. It's not better, and it is different, but they are both at the same level.

Agreed.

[Wolf Kanno]

Books tend to be better cause if you were to make them into movies verbatim then theny would take more time than most people have the attention span for. Movies tend to come out as the Reader's Digest version of the books. They take the core elements and leave out all the details and nuances that make the stories amazing. Movies are trash anyway...

[Miriel]

Forest Gump, Pride & Prejudice, and... there was one more but Spuuky made me forget it.

Fight Club the movie is on-par with Fight Club the book. It's not better, and it is different, but they are both at the same level.

Agreed.

Can't believe I forgot Pride and Prejudice! The 2005 version was sooo good.

[Shlup]

It was! I read the book and it was just dull compared to the movie. In the movie they added desire and passion that the book was too "proper" for.

And then the hardcore Austen fans complained about the lack of accuacy. Screw those guys! It was hot!

[MustangCobraSVT]

Can i get the Bourne series?

[The Summoner of Leviathan]

I've never read the book version of Jurassic Park, but the film version is damn good. I can't imagine the book being better than what Spielberg managed to capture on screen.

My friends used to go on about the book all the time, saying it's way better than the movie. I kept meaning to read it but never got around to it...

Meh, if it is anything like Timeline then I'd say the movies are better. That being said, Timeline made a far better movie than it ever did a novel.

[Big D]

Crichton's original Jurassic Park is pretty solid. The dinosaurs are less like savage monsters and more like actual animals. The gore is much more intense and frequent, though, and the characterisations are often very different. There's also the small matter of the near-complete reversal of who lives and who dies.

Worth a read if you found the film too lightweight.

[Miriel]

Worth a read if you found the film too lightweight.

Too lightweight? Oh my god, the movie was just about the scariest thing I had ever seen in my life at that age. I was like... 7 years old or something. And it practically made me pee my pants.

[Ouch!]

Worth a read if you found the film too lightweight.

Too lightweight? Oh my god, the movie was just about the scariest thing I had ever seen in my life at that age. I was like... 7 years old or something. And it practically made me pee my pants. :p

I watched it with my mom when I was four. I was obsessed with dinosaurs at the time, and I'd been begging her to let me watch it for ages. She finally cracked at like two AM when I refused to go to sleep. "Now, Zach, if it ever gets too scary, just tell me." She stopped the movie three times because she was terrified.

I thought it was the most awesome thing ever.

[Del Murder]

The Godfather - decent but pulpish book, bloody classic movie.

Winner. I'd say Jurassic Park counts, though.

[Germ Hamee]

Meh, if it is anything like Timeline then I'd say the movies are better. That being said, Timeline made a far better movie than it ever did a novel.

Wow. I don't think I could disagree with you more. O.O That movie was horrible, and I loved the book.

I think Jurassic Park is the only good book-to-movie adaptation of Michael Crichton's works. Granted, they're nothing alike, but it's probably the only movie that I don't mind the changes made.

[Breine]

Forest Gump, Pride & Prejudice, and... there was one more but Spuuky made me forget it.

Fight Club the movie is on-par with Fight Club the book. It's not better, and it is different, but they are both at the same level.

Agreed.

Can't believe I forgot Pride and Prejudice! The 2005 version was sooo good.

I've never read the book, but the 2005 movie was really great. Although the book's a classic I doubt I'd enjoy it more than the movie.

[Sweet Beloved]

Books are a lot better than the movies. Hollywood puts too much into them and switch them around too much to try to make them more exciting, when it just normally bombs, like how Annete Curtis Klause's book Blood and Chocolate has a different ending than the movie portrayed.

But there are some movies that are excellent, like The Notebook.

It just depends on who makes them. But They should stick with the books fully.

[Quindiana Jones]

Lord of the Rings movies were fantastic. But nothing compared to the book.

Harry Potter films are mediocre, at best. Books are quite good. To me, at least, the books have got boring as I've read them too many times. Good books, but they seem to have little re-read factor.

The Prisoner of Azkaban was amazing as a film. It was the only one to actually capture something that the other movies didn't have. It was great artistically. It's just completely different from the book. Too bad Alfonso Quaron can't do any more of the HP movies - PoA had the best atmosphere... And they should bring John Williams back as the composer.

The films would be good if they stopped unnecessarily changing the plot and the sequence of events. Book to film does need some work to make it shorter etc., but most of the stuff changed in HP was complete bollocks and needless.

Plus, the crappy actors. Well, "child" actors. Rupert Grint = good. Dan Radcliffe, Girl-who-plays-Hermione, pretty much everyone else = crap.

3 was awesome because of Sirius, or should I say the magnificence that is Gary Oldman. <3

[The Summoner of Leviathan]

Meh, if it is anything like Timeline then I'd say the movies are better. That being said, Timeline made a far better movie than it ever did a novel.

Wow. I don't think I could disagree with you more. O.O That movie was horrible, and I loved the book.

I think Jurassic Park is the only good book-to-movie adaptation of Michael Crichton's works. Granted, they're nothing alike, but it's probably the only movie that I don't mind the changes made.

I couldn't finish the book. I just could not get into it. I am not saying the movie was amazing just that I enjoyed it more than the book thus for me it was better than the book.

Also, Fellowship of the Ring made a good movie. I found the novel much more boring than the other two.