Instances Where the Movie is Better than the Book
I think this thread already exists (if so--feel free to delete this one) but I just finished reading "Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption" and, while I do like the story, I can't help feeling that I liked the movie better.
Usually, I'm disappointed in movies if I've read the book first. Sometimes, as with Interview with a Vampire and American Psycho, I'll like a movie better after reading the book.
But this is what I can come up with--but I don't think either of them really count:
The Godfather--the book is awesome but I like how Coppala staged the climax.
A Clockwork Orange--again, the book is awesome but the movie was made before Kubrick knew about that final crappy chapter.
That's all I can think of right now. Curious to see if anyone else has found any.
It's not necessarily an instance of better v worse, but I thought the Lord of the Rings series was exceptionally well-suited to carry you into that universe, visually-wise. Obviously the books were awesome, but the movies gave them a new dimension.
I have seen several cases of that myself with Fight Club(preferred the movie ending)and Perfume: The Story of a Murderer.
I like Crepes.
Oh, Perfume! That's a good one. I still can't think of any, really. Maybe Casino Royale, but I've only gone through the first few chapters, and I'm not even sure it qualifies as that much of an adaptation. Same goes for The Prestige.
One good possibility is Goodfellas. Again, haven't read the book.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
I think that the Swedish film version for the first "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" was better than the book...the other two movies sorta went down hill compared to the books. But I think the first book dragged quite a bit in the beginning and the movie did a good job of shortening it. Has anyone seen the film version of "Naked Lunch?" Always wanted to compare that one.
"For most of this century, scientists have worshiped the hardware of the brain and the software of the mind; the messy powers of the heart were left to the poets."
The film version is not really meant to be a literal translation of the book.
As such, it is not quite an unviewable mess.
This is why we can't have nice things.
....
You gonna keep us hanging?
This is why we can't have nice things.
Well making a book into a decent movie can work but I think it can depend on how descriptive the book is. I'll use perfume as an example again. The sense of smell is something I didn't think was possible to really describe effectively until I read Perfume. It captures the sense of smell in an astonishing way. When I heard about the film I thought there was no way it could do the sense of smell justice but the camera work and score helped convey it perfectly.
I like Crepes.
The ending in the movie Fight Club works far more in my opinion for a film than the one in the book. The message of destroying the headquarters of financial institutions appeals to a broader audience and today's issues of financial crisis than just destroying a museum symbolizing erasing history. The last chapter in the mental institution would also have been wrong with the movie's theme.
I like Crepes.
I'm guessing that if your on this site there's no need to put SPOILERS all over this. But, I took the ending of the book entirely different. After all, "Paraffin has never, ever worked for me."
Sorry, I was really more kind of hanging on your "several" followed by two examples. You din't need to justify them, I was just wanting for more. It's rare for a film to improve upon a book - albeit certainly doable, sure - so I'd care to hear of others in your opinion.
This is why we can't have nice things.
Mystic River, The Shining(one of my favorites), Lord of the Rings(about equal imo) and to a degree The Kite Runner.
I like Crepes.
haha I love that line about Paraffin. I think the book was more idealistic than the movie and even more complex. I like the book more in many aspects but it was the simplicity of the ending in the movie that I liked. It may just be that Fincher is a magician(I can't wait to see his version a TGWTDT).
I like Crepes.
The movie Choke was better then the book.
I mean, they're both awful, but the movie was less awful since it only lasted like two hours.
I liked both.
I watched Interview with a Vampire the other day...I forgot that the movie and the book are very different. It has been a while since I read the book but I remember the beginning being totally different than the film version.
"For most of this century, scientists have worshiped the hardware of the brain and the software of the mind; the messy powers of the heart were left to the poets."
I think Kubrick always improves upon the source material his films are adapted from.
OK. I'm going to do this the best way I know how; with a list,
1. The book Choke was awesome, the movie verson I only half saw so I can't pass judgement.
2. *SPOILERS* I liked the ending of the Fight Club book better than the film, even though I do agree the film was amazing and very much on equal footing with the book. That being said, I feel like the ending to the book was more suited because I think (possibly wrongly) that the point at the end was that he created something he couldn't destroy. Like when he tried to tell the cops and stop it all, and they almost took his balls, even though he started it. Then at the end of the book when they tell him that everythings going to be OK and that there going to get him out, even though he doesn't remember his status as leader of Project Mayhem, he is doomed to fufill that role. He is, in a way, a pawn in his own game, that he no longer controls. Like in Survivor (SPOILERS AGAIN), Tender decides to take those first steps towards stardom, he chooses to sign off on things he doesn't understand, and enventually his life starts rolling so fast he can't even stay clear of it, and this life becomes its own entity, fully seperate of the calm, pious, house cleaner in the first half of the book. The same way as Tyler Durden whipped himself into existance, and (SNUFF SPOILER) the lady in Snuff can't avoid her demise. She doesnt neccessarily want to die, she just understands that her life story is bigger than her own personal momentary happiness. A legacy is bigger than you, and you dont get to control the mythos, even if the myth is based on you, and at some point, the decisions start to make themselves.
AGAIN, I'm probably wrong.
3. Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. Thats my film to book comparision. The film and book were both amazing, but completely different. When you read the book, you are in Hunter's shoes, and that acid trip is way more dark, disorienting, and terrifying. Whereas in the film, which is alsmost an exact copy if I remeber correctly, you watch it happen to someone else, and it is, therefor, funny, because of the distance between you and the charactor. Same words, opposite reactions.
This needs to be sigged.
Pepper just made my day.
As much as I like Chuck, I don't think Fight Club is that strong compared to his other books. I think it's a great first book, but I think Fincher definitely added something to the adaptation making the movie much better than the book.