It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Movies that are as good or better than the books

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 10:49 PM
Great choices, all!

I loved Terry Gilliam's adaptation of 1984 (Brazil). But I know it doesn't quite count.

One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest is excellent, both movie and book.

I loved The Godfather- film and book.

Primal Fear- film perhaps a bit better?

No Country For Old Men was a great movie!

The Crow is perhaps as good as the graphic novel that inspired it.

Something Wicked This Way Comes was better in film.

Fun fact: Ray Bradbury wrote the screenplay for Moby Dick (1956). But I like the book better than anything so it's hard to measure up

Thanks for the fun thread!
edit on 18-6-2017 by zosimov because: added more!

posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 10:54 PM
ditto on the Shining, it's probably the best example of this in all honesty, Kubrick knew his interpretation and vision of that story was superior to King's, who was giving him hell over the script. As a big FU to King, he switched the color of the VW in the opening scene.

To add a couple I know of...

Johnny Got His Gun

Stand By Me

First Blood

Jacobs Ladder - Though not a true book to film traslation by any means, it was heavily base on 'An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge' written in 1891 and latter adapted to the twilight zone, which it's known for.

posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 11:12 PM
a reply to: argentus

I just now watched no country for old men. Thanks. It was real good

posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 11:18 PM

originally posted by: visitedbythem
a reply to: argentus

I just now watched no country for old men. Thanks. It was real good

Hello Friendo.....

posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 11:43 PM

originally posted by: ketsuko
For me personally, I'd have to say The Lord of the Rings trilogy. Not because the movie actually is better than the books per se, but because I'd never been able to get into the books to read them. Maybe it's Tolkien's writing style on the trilogy because I've read and enjoyed The Hobbit many times, but I just can't get into the trilogy.

So, not having been able to slog through the trilogy, the obvious answer is that the movies had to be better!

Tolkien just had to many characters in the book, it was just so hard to keep up with all the information. The movies characters where so well developed and defined you could follow it far easier
I agree, the movie was better than the book

The Princess bride comes to mind and Willy Wonkas Chocolate factory, the original. I guess because though they were dark but not nearly as dark as the books

posted on Jun, 17 2017 @ 11:43 PM
a reply to: argentus

2001 was a good movie, but it trailed so far from the book. Instead of Jupiter the movie goes to Saturn. To add insult to injury a.c. clark sold out and when he wrote the first sequel he changed the book to reflect Saturn in order to let the next movie follow more closely.

posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 01:30 AM

originally posted by: scraedtosleep

I find a few steven king movies to be better than his books.
I am not with you guys about a song of ice and fire , not at all.
Never read nor seen great expectations

Same here! Cujo is another of that sort.

The Fire and Ice stuff, very personal taste, to be sure! I'd like both more if they weren't so overtly raunchy.

Never did myself! Not my style, really!

posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 01:32 AM

originally posted by: Missmissie173
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

ITA - "Sliver Bullet" was a much better movie then the book. I am a big King fan but he does go on at does another of my favorites, Anne Rice. "Interview With The Vampire" was a great book, but the movie was incredible. I always wished they would make "The Witching Hour" into a movie.

Yes, he does! He gets a bit juvenile at times, as well. My favorite of his was always The Eyes of the Dragon; not one most of his fans would name!

Agree on Interview with the Vampire - far better as a movie!
edit on 18-6-2017 by LadyGreenEyes because: typo

posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 04:15 AM
Maze Runner

posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 05:11 AM
a reply to: argentus

Nosferatu was simply a blatant ripoff of Dracula, because they couldn't get the film rights. But I do think they imparted the feeling of constant dread and looming menace better than Stoker was able to articulate it on the page.
I haven't read Dances with Wolves, so I can't compare that one, but I agree with your other choices.
edit on 18-6-2017 by pfishy because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 05:33 AM
a reply to: argentus

Discworld: The Colour of Magic.

I've read quite a lot of the discworld novels and that one was pretty much spot on, especially with the visuals.

posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 05:39 AM
I would suggest the Sin City was as good as the source material, as well. And Watchmen was as close to better as possible.

posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 06:02 AM

originally posted by: DrumsRfun
Life of Pi by Yann Martel,both the book and the movie were pretty good.

Great book and movie!!

For me it's a chick flick/book. The Notebook! I loved the movie and the book. I am a sap for romance!

posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 09:20 AM

posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 09:41 AM
A lot of one's have already been listed but I'll throw another one in. Years ago we watched Harrison Bergeron in one of my highschool english classes. Sometime later I read the short story it was based on. The movie was a lot better. Also, A Boy and His Dog is almost word for word to the story. Its a really dark movie though.

posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 10:03 AM
a reply to: argentus

I'm gonna cheat here...
Malpertuis has always been one of my favourite movies.
I have just (about ten mins ago) scored a winning bid on 'a certain auction site' a copy of the book in English so I'll read it as soon as it arrives then get back to you.
Pretty sure I'll still love the film, though.


posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 02:07 PM
a reply to: ketsuko

I agree, not a fan of his style. My favorite genre of books but could not read them.

posted on Jun, 18 2017 @ 02:13 PM
I am sorry I can think of none. The book is always better than the movie based on it in my experiences.

However, I will point out that this does not always hold true for the other way. Books based off of movies are often worse than the movie. I attribute this to the restrictions in which the book must fall as placed by the movie.

posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 08:38 PM
a reply to: argentus

As promised, reporting back...

Only halfway through the book but so far its exceeded my expectations so I think I'm safe to say that its the book of the year for me!!!

Of course, I'm still seeing images from the film but the descriptions have been spot on. There are a few differences but not too many. The language is quite olde worlde which I quite like and some parts are explained in text which were not too clear in the film.
Ambiguous glances, mysterious unexplained sounds in the house etc are detailed better in the book which don't translate in film.

I cannot recommend it highly enough to anyone who enjoys a good Gothic novel. Creepy, dark, mysterious with spots of humour to be found. Apologies for going on about it but I've been after this for years and recently watched the film (a few times) before getting the English version in print. Its AWESOME!

Yeah, I'm a bit weird.

posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 08:50 PM
a reply to: argentus

Both The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (Fincher's American version) and CAROL did it for me. The screenplay Phyllis Nagy dreamt up for CAROL, at least, did The Price of Salt equal if not better justice. Found Larsson's TGWTDT great, but Fincher's adaptation got me

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in