MedVision ad

Books turned into movies (2 Viewers)

happy cup

has left BOS :)
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
210
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Harry Potter? The Notebook? A Walk to remember? Lord of the Rings? etc etc. Is the movie version usually better than the book?
 
Last edited:

Sarah168

London Calling
Joined
Dec 25, 2003
Messages
5,320
Location
Sydney
Gender
Female
HSC
2004
harry potter books > harry potter movies

walk to remember book > movie

dont know about others.
 

jumb

mr jumb
Joined
Jun 24, 2004
Messages
6,184
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
happy cup said:
Harry Potter? The Notebook? A Walk to remember? Lord of the Rings? etc ect. Is the movie version usually better than the book?
Obviously not becase alot of information is forfeited to make the movie shorter.

The da vinci code is being turned into a movie.
 

Benny_

Elementary Penguin
Joined
Oct 8, 2003
Messages
2,261
Location
Wollongong
Gender
Male
HSC
2003
Movies are very rarely better than the books they were based on. A few examples I can think of off the top of my head are:

Million Dollar Baby
The Shawshank Redemption
The Shining
Misery
Schindler's List
Dr Strangelove
 

im an idiot

or am i?
Joined
Mar 9, 2005
Messages
424
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
the shining and misery were indeed the only 2 of the hundred stephen king movies better than the book
 

persephone

Active Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2004
Messages
1,068
Location
Sydney
Gender
Female
HSC
2004
the books are always better than the films. always. the films always forget something or point to something that isn't there. or add bits or take away bits. i always opt for the book over the film, but i'll still watch the film version. what i really hate is the novelisations of the film. they're just a bit crap.
 
Joined
May 3, 2004
Messages
1,695
Gender
Female
HSC
2004
persephone said:
the books are always better than the films. always. the films always forget something or point to something that isn't there. or add bits or take away bits. i always opt for the book over the film, but i'll still watch the film version. what i really hate is the novelisations of the film. they're just a bit crap.

not ALWAYS! but usually.. THE NOTEBOOK movie was way better than the book
 

happy cup

has left BOS :)
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
210
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
go_swans said:
not ALWAYS! but usually.. THE NOTEBOOK movie was way better than the book
Yeh I agree. The A walk to remember movie is also way better then the book.
 

Benny_

Elementary Penguin
Joined
Oct 8, 2003
Messages
2,261
Location
Wollongong
Gender
Male
HSC
2003
Nick Hornby adaptations are all pretty good aren't they. I still like the book version of High Fidelity better though, so much funnier.
 

_Bushra_

wtf?!
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Messages
793
Location
Hoping to befriend somebody nice at club MQ *freak
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
persephone said:
the books are always better than the films. always. the films always forget something or point to something that isn't there. or add bits or take away bits. i always opt for the book over the film, but i'll still watch the film version.

I TOTALLY AGREE. Books are so much more fun to read. Of course if I liked the book I will eventually watch the movie to reinforce things that i didnt get in the book (like in "The Beach". I didnt get some stuff they did in the book and the movie cleared it up for me) :)

I have found that the movies are prety dissapointing. All the Harry Potter movies have been pretty shit IMO
 

Jumbo Cactuar

Argentous Fingers
Joined
Sep 8, 2003
Messages
425
Gender
Male
HSC
2003
Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy...

Which retard cast that movie? (no offence to retards)

Books ( and radio series I presume ) without a doubt!!! :uhhuh:
 

bazookajoe

Shy Guy
Joined
May 23, 2005
Messages
3,207
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest was very close. I couldn't split the difference, as both were incredible. Jack Nicholson did an amazing job as MacMurphy, but the book was fantastic as well.
Most books are better than the movie, unless you see the movie first. The book kind of portrays your own image of the movie, so when you see it visually you're thinking "I thought he would look/do that differently".
 

marchetta

shut up and do me
Joined
Feb 5, 2004
Messages
664
Location
Somewhere over the rainbow
Gender
Female
HSC
2004
Books tend to be better. They're more detailed and in some movies, they usually tend to cut all the good stuff out! The House of Sand and Fog was really good...but get the feeling that the book was better.
 

glitter burns

the sky is falling
Joined
Oct 23, 2003
Messages
723
Location
Wollongong
Gender
Female
HSC
2003
bazookajoe said:
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest was very close. I couldn't split the difference, as both were incredible. Jack Nicholson did an amazing job as MacMurphy, but the book was fantastic as well.
Most books are better than the movie, unless you see the movie first. The book kind of portrays your own image of the movie, so when you see it visually you're thinking "I thought he would look/do that differently".
I got so annoyed that Jack Nicholson was cast as McMurphy because he didn't fit the physical description that the author has gone to pains to express... haven't actually seen the movie though, so I can't say anything else about it.


But yeah, books are better than the movie about 99% of the time.
 

gordo

Resident Jew
Joined
Feb 5, 2004
Messages
2,352
Location
bondi, sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
the book sahara was sooo much better than the movie.. to date its still one of the best books i've read.
the movie made a real meal of it, they just exchanged the intriguing story line for hollywood
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 2)

Top