The Book was better than the Movie....

Hence the "almost".  I'm actually surprised they changed it as, by modern standards, it's not that unhappy an ending.  Ah well.

Being alienated from your village and family? I suppose it depends on your family!  I do prefer the film's ending with the dialogue just being drowned out to snogging and music and sod what the letter has to say. 

Oh...I thought of a film better than the novel, at least IMO: Fight Club.  But to be fair, I saw the film first (unspoiled), and I still really liked the book.

What did you find quasi-serious about the movie?  I don't think there's any seriousness in it at all.  But I frankly found the book a bit tedious. 

I meant that they took the story and translated it directly to the film, completely losing Goldman's narration/interjections.  They sort of did it with the grandfather, but it didn't have the same feeling to me.

I know I'm in the minority with loving the book, but I'm okay with that.

Being alienated from your village and family? I suppose it depends on your family!  I do prefer the film's ending with the dialogue just being drowned out to snogging and music and sod what the letter has to say. 

If I read the book for the first time at my current age, I'd probably be right with you.  But reading it at 16 years old, I was 100% on the side of love.  Screw the family and friends - I want the hot guy!

Not that I loved the book, but Girl with a Pearl Earring. At least the book had a decent plot. If I had not read it I would have had absolutely no clue what was happening in the film. Pretty to look at, but not much else.

Sometimes a wonderful movie version makes me want to read the book.  For example, the BBC (TV, not movie, the Colin Firth version) version of "Pride and Prejudice" inspired me to read the book which I loved--read it twice after seeing that version.  The same with Jane Eyre--saw the version which came out a bit over 10 years ago and loved it.  Finally read the book a few years ago and loved it just as much. 

You can love a book just as much as the movie and vice-versa, but for different reasons.  The movie versions of Jane Eyre and P &P were glorious for the costumes, hairstyles, mood, interiors, etc. etc.  The books were wonderful because of the inner perspective of characters (thoughts, motivations, etc.) that doesn't always come through on film.

I love the BBC pride and prejudice, but I also think the Keira Knightly film is fantastic, it feels modern without being updated and is very brilliantly directed, I also adore the score.

It's interesting how one book can produce two very different but very good versions. The BBC version is more faithful to the book (and longer obviously) but the film versions sweeps me up and is very tender and atmospheric

I love the BBC pride and prejudice, but I also think the Keira Knightly film is fantastic, it feels modern without being updated and is very brilliantly directed, I also adore the score.

It's interesting how one book can produce two very different but very good versions. The BBC version is more faithful to the book (and longer obviously) but the film versions sweeps me up and is very tender and atmospheric

I did like this version, even though I don't care for Keira Knightly very much.

The Little Princess.  The book was better than any version by miles, except for the three hour LWT version made in the 80s.  

Sorry, the father dies!  DIES!  

Not that I loved the book, but Girl with a Pearl Earring. At least the book had a decent plot. If I had not read it I would have had absolutely no clue what was happening in the film. Pretty to look at, but not much else.

ITA.  I liked the book (not love), but the film was only good for the eye candy (costumes, design, some of the actors/actresses).

I was reading through the "depressing movie" thread and saw a couple people post about books which were much better than their subsequent movies. I had to agree with most of them. And since I'm an avid reader and movie watcher and have had lots of opportunities to compare, I was wondering what other people would list as some of their picks. Here's a few of mine:

Book better than movie:
The Da Vinci Code
All of the Harry Potters
The Golden Compass (Massively better!)
Memoirs of a Geisha
The Other Boleyn Girl
Stephen King's The Stand / The Mist
The Count of Monte Cristo
The Kite Runner
The Outsiders

Alternately, I've occasionally found that it can go the other way....

Movie actually better than the book:
The Notebook
Bridges of Madison County
The Princess Bride
Fried Green Tomatoes
Jurassic Park (no surprise there)
PS I love you
The Hours
Stand by me (Stephen King's The Body)
Silence of the Lambs

Anybody have others to add?

I have to disagree with you about The Notebook & P.S. I Love the movie being better then book!! I'm not a big reader but I loved both books better than the movie itself I still enjoyed each movie don't get me wrong just enjoyed the book way more!!    

White Oleander & Where The Red Fern Grows both books I liked better than the movie granted I still enjoyed each movie just liked the book better!!   

But I disagree the King books make better movies.  So many of his characters are dealing with internal struggles that the films can't really portray, or don't do it well.

In my opinion, King is at his best with his shorts and (a few of) his novellas. Gramma is one of my all time favorites from King. Same with The Raft.  And The Jaunt.  I do like what was said about him chosing film students for his movies...but do we really need to see the cables holding up the vampires as they fly around in Salem's Lot? I mean, seriously. Cables.

I didn't think Cujo was half bad as a movie. Neither was Pet Cemetary. Of course I saw them when I was in junior high and my movie ratings at that age was based on entirely different things. Plot...who needs plot! Does it give me an excuse to grab by boyfriend's arm in mock terror? Perfect!

Books that were better than the movie:

Trainspotting - I still like the movie, but the book just captures a lot more variety in the characters' lives.

The Mists of Avalon - not a feature film, but TNT did a mini-series several years back.  This is unique in that they managed to include almost all of the important details of the story, and a lot of the dialogue comes through nearly verbatim.  And yet they still managed to completely alter the point of the story.  That's a special kind of fail.


I can't recall any films I've seen that I thought were better than the book.  I did find an instance on TV, though.  I'm a fan of the show Bones.  Last time I flew to Scotland, I ran out of reading material, so I picked up a paperback from the series that Bones is 'based on.'  I was expecting that some of the details, setting, etc. would be different, but thought that the main character, Brennan, would be similarly quirky.  Not at all.  I found the character in the book very dull and ordinary and almost completely interchangeable with every other stock forensic/detective character in mass market mystery series.  I was really disappointed.

Books that were better than the movie:

Trainspotting - I still like the movie, but the book just captures a lot more variety in the characters' lives.

The Mists of Avalon - not a feature film, but TNT did a mini-series several years back.  This is unique in that they managed to include almost all of the important details of the story, and a lot of the dialogue comes through nearly verbatim.  And yet they still managed to completely alter the point of the story.  That's a special kind of fail.


I can't recall any films I've seen that I thought were better than the book.  I did find an instance on TV, though.  I'm a fan of the show Bones.  Last time I flew to Scotland, I ran out of reading material, so I picked up a paperback from the series that Bones is 'based on.'  I was expecting that some of the details, setting, etc. would be different, but thought that the main character, Brennan, would be similarly quirky.  Not at all.  I found the character in the book very dull and ordinary and almost completely interchangeable with every other stock forensic/detective character in mass market mystery series.  I was really disappointed.

I was thinking of The Mists of Avalon, too!  It's my favorite book of all time--read it 10 times or so.  The TV production was good for the costumes, etc. and Morgaine was just as I pictured her in the book, but you're right about changing the point of it--especially at the end with everyone starting to worship Mary instead of the mother Goddess.

I'm also a huge fan of Bones, but haven't read the books--now I won't bother.

Less than Zero. What a creepy and bizarre book - the crappy 80's film didn't even come close to conveying the feeling of the book, which is positively disturbing.

I was thinking of The Mists of Avalon, too!  It's my favorite book of all time

I liked the miniseries but I didnt know it was a book! Going to have to add that t the reading list 

In my opinion, King is at his best with his shorts and (a few of) his novellas. Gramma is one of my all time favorites from King. Same with The Raft.  And The Jaunt.  I do like what was said about him chosing film students for his movies...but do we really need to see the cables holding up the vampires as they fly around in Salem's Lot? I mean, seriously. Cables.

Yeah, sadly that wasn't a film done by a student.  All the films done by students are not allowed to be commercially released.  So whichever version of Salem's Lot you are referring to, the 70s or 00s version, that was all done by an actual professional.

The student films are all for little events, none have been released in the pubic expect for a few on a video in the 80s and one that was online but was pulled after the agreed to time.

Depressing that they can't get rid of the wires in an actual production, isn't it.  But then I see a lot of boom mikes in supposedly professional productions as well.