books to movies

[sublime]

so i finally saw Papillon with steve mqueen and dustin hoffman after reading the book a few years ago (henri cheririe (sp)).

the book is sooo good, you almost feel like you are standing right there with him, while the movie is just a collections of scenes from the book, that when thrown together make little sense. does anybody else who read the book feel the same way after seeing the movie?

books > movies

rant over

[touchfaith]

'Rich Man, Poor Man'
'A Beautiful Mind'

Dug each book...hated the movies.

[sublime]

[ QUOTE ]
'Rich Man, Poor Man'
'A Beautiful Mind'

Dug each book...hated the movies.

[/ QUOTE ]

See, I thought a beutifull mind was OK. However, i have not read the book. I would probably think the movie was awful if I read the book. Such a dillema.

The green mile made a good trasition. So did GoodFellas.

[hoopsie44]

As great as "One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest" and "LA Confidential" were as movies, I think the books were even better.

[RacersEdge]

Has a movie ever been better than the book its based on?

[Vince Young]

[ QUOTE ]
Has a movie ever been better than the book its based on?

[/ QUOTE ]
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0001NBNB6.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

[RacersEdge]

Maybe - I never read the book.

[daryn]

i generally like the movie better. you know why?

NO READING WHATSOEVER INVOLVED

[Sightless]

Fight Club

[MrMon]

The World According To Garp. Loved the movie. Hated, hated, hated, hated the book.

[Wyers]

[ QUOTE ]
Fight Club

[/ QUOTE ]

Great flick - one of my faves.

But the book is wicked good. I may give this one a tie. Probably one of the best adaptations.

[tdarko]

[ QUOTE ]
Great flick - one of my faves.

But the book is wicked good. I may give this one a tie. Probably one of the best adaptations.

[/ QUOTE ]
book is better (though the movie was good), they are going to adapt survivor soon and i can't wait to see how the rip that one apart.

[sublime]

they are going to adapt survivor soon

is this a book i should read?

[ QUOTE ]
they are going to adapt survivor soon

is this a book i should read?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but I put "choke" up there before that. I would love to see a movie about that.

[sublime]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
they are going to adapt survivor soon

is this a book i should read?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but I put "choke" up there before that. I would love to see a movie about that.

[/ QUOTE ]

i read choke. cool stuff.

[tdarko]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, but I put "choke" up there before that. I would love to see a movie about that.

[/ QUOTE ]
really? i don't even put choke in chuck's top 3 (although its a great [censored] book).

survivor
invisible monsters
fight club
then choke

i have those in front of it, but then again that is like my opinion man. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Moneyline]

Add DELIVERANCE, A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, JAWS, FLETCH, CONFESSIONS OF A DANGEROUS MIND, and several hundred others to the list. People always say the book is better than the movie, but I think it's a lot closer to 50/50 than most people think.

"The Clan of the Cave Bear" Jane Auel. I never saw the movie but Darryl Hannah starred in it and I heard it was lousy so I go with this book>movie.

[pryor15]

[ QUOTE ]
they are going to adapt survivor soon

is this THE palahniuk book i should read?

[/ QUOTE ]

yes, yes it is.

FYP

[Dominic]

I've always felt this comparison between a book and a subsequent movie adapted from said book is silly.

They are two completely different mediums.

Saying a certain movie "ruined" the book it came from is ridiculous: you still have the book, don't you?

Yes, most movies made from books are not as satisfying and there's a very good reason for this: books are mostly about the internal thoughts of the characters, while movies are usually about the actions of the main protaganist.

Plus, we like books for more reasons that the basic plot - language, a sense of delicious pacing that lasts as long as you are reading the book. A movie only lasts for a couple of hours and then it's over.

It's like comparing a 7 course meal at a 4-star restaurant with the best pizza joint in town. What's the point?

The internal/external differences also is the reason why you rarely see a great movie made from a great piece of literature - it's almost impossible to translate the language and internal thoughts of a beloved character to the screen and retain what was unique and speacial about the book in the first place.

That's why "potboilers," or books that are all plot - John Grisham, etc. - make better movies than, say, F. Scott Fitzgerald. Grisham is all plot - perfect for adaptation to the screen.

anyway, my two cents.

[sublime]

[ QUOTE ]
I've always felt this comparison between a book and a subsequent movie adapted from said book is silly.

They are two completely different mediums.

Saying a certain movie "ruined" the book it came from is ridiculous: you still have the book, don't you?

Yes, most movies made from books are not as satisfying and there's a very good reason for this: books are mostly about the internal thoughts of the characters, while movies are usually about the actions of the main protaganist.

Plus, we like books for more reasons that the basic plot - language, a sense of delicious pacing that lasts as long as you are reading the book. A movie only lasts for a couple of hours and then it's over.

It's like comparing a 7 course meal at a 4-star restaurant with the best pizza joint in town. What's the point?

The internal/external differences also is the reason why you rarely see a great movie made from a great piece of literature - it's almost impossible to translate the language and internal thoughts of a beloved character to the screen and retain what was unique and speacial about the book in the first place.

That's why "potboilers," or books that are all plot - John Grisham, etc. - make better movies than, say, F. Scott Fitzgerald. Grisham is all plot - perfect for adaptation to the screen.

anyway, my two cents.

[/ QUOTE ]

great post.

btw the movie didnt ruin the book for me, i want to read it again. i just feel that the people who saw the movie and didnt read the book are cheated. i suppose thats the way i am supposed to feel though.

[chuddo]

the orchid thief.

[tdarko]

[ QUOTE ]
btw the movie didnt ruin the book for me, i want to read it again. i just feel that the people who saw the movie and didnt read the book are cheated. i suppose thats the way i am supposed to feel though.


[/ QUOTE ]
this is exactly my take on the situation as well. for instance when i saw fight club with a group of people i came out of the theatre saying how there is so much more and how palahniuk wants you to see this and that and they were like, "dude it was good, chill out." but i wanted them to feel what i felt when reading chuck's words.

[istewart]

tdarko,

Have you read Haunted yet by Palahniuk? Thoughts if you have?

[chuddo]

haunted is tripe.

the main story (50% of the book) is pretty terrible.

the short stories themselves range from pretty great to not good.

so there is probably about 25% worth of quality writing to tbe found there in my opinion. not really worth it.

'the camera behind the camera behind the.....quit f'ing repeating yourself chuck.

[tdarko]

[ QUOTE ]
tdarko,

Have you read Haunted yet by Palahniuk? Thoughts if you have?

[/ QUOTE ]
yes and i loved it, i thought chuck's books had been getting worse (which is still not bad of course), i didn't like diary, and i didn't like his travel book (some parts funny) or his switch to fiction and i thought haunted was getting back to what he does best even though the genre wasn't that of his first few books.

[tdarko]

[ QUOTE ]
'the camera behind the camera behind the.....quit f'ing repeating yourself chuck.

[/ QUOTE ]
have you not read the rest of his stuff? he writes this way for a reason.

[JaBlue]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, but I put "choke" up there before that. I would love to see a movie about that.

[/ QUOTE ]
really? i don't even put choke in chuck's top 3 (although its a great [censored] book).

survivor
invisible monsters
fight club
then choke

i have those in front of it, but then again that is like my opinion man. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Palahniuk sucks.

Fight Club is a good book if its the only Palahniuk book you read, but come on. The movie's much better.

[chuddo]

i've read all of his books solely so i can feel justified in saying that on whole, he sucks.

[JaBlue]

[ QUOTE ]
i've read all of his books solely so i can feel justified in saying that on whole, he sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have read a lot of Palahniuks writing and I can verify that he does infact suck. He is an overrated piece of [censored]

[tdarko]

[ QUOTE ]
Palahniuk sucks.


[/ QUOTE ]
stick to your grisham's and clancy's and i will stick with chuck and some others.

[tdarko]

[ QUOTE ]
He is an overrated piece of [censored]

[/ QUOTE ]
i see your posts a lot and they are always so angry, what gives?

[JaBlue]

I like Grisham (have only read one book) but am not a big fan of Clancy.

[JaBlue]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He is an overrated piece of [censored]

[/ QUOTE ]
i see your posts a lot and they are always so angry, what gives?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry to be angry a lot but I especially hate Palahniuk. He is SO goddamned overrated. All of his books that I have read (about 5) are essentially about the same things and are written in the same style. If you can stomach that for more than one book, it is my humble opinion that you are subjecting yourself to some trite bullshit.

This review says a lot of what I'd like to say: http://archive.salon.com/books/review/2003/08/20/palahniuk/index_np.html
Palahniuk responds to it with "where's your last book" and "Fitzgerald got horrible reviews on Gatsby." Basically he is a giant prick who wears open-chested shirts way too often.

And lastly his fanbase is primarily composed of poseurs. I don't know you so don't think I'm calling you one

[tdarko]

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry to be angry a lot but I especially hate Palahniuk. He is SO goddamned overrated. All of his books that I have read (about 5) are essentially about the same things and are written in the same style. If you can stomach that for more than one book, it is my humble opinion that you are subjecting yourself to some trite bullshit.

This review says a lot of what I'd like to say: http://archive.salon.com/books/review/2003/08/20/palahniuk/index_np.html
Palahniuk responds to it with "where's your last book" and "Fitzgerald got horrible reviews on Gatsby." Basically he is a giant prick who wears open-chested shirts way too often.

And lastly his fanbase is primarily composed of poseurs. I don't know you so don't think I'm calling you one

[/ QUOTE ]
see this is better. i was just wondering why you were calling him a piece of [censored] when a simple "i don't like him i think he sucks" would do just fine.

as the review goes, i think he is a little defensive right now because he has been basically in a slump (as far as reviews go)since lullaby.

anyway i don't listen to reviews, i read the book then decide and IMO haunted was way better than stranger than fiction which is the book of his that you would compare it to.

[JaBlue]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Sorry to be angry a lot but I especially hate Palahniuk. He is SO goddamned overrated. All of his books that I have read (about 5) are essentially about the same things and are written in the same style. If you can stomach that for more than one book, it is my humble opinion that you are subjecting yourself to some trite bullshit.

This review says a lot of what I'd like to say: http://archive.salon.com/books/review/2003/08/20/palahniuk/index_np.html
Palahniuk responds to it with "where's your last book" and "Fitzgerald got horrible reviews on Gatsby." Basically he is a giant prick who wears open-chested shirts way too often.

And lastly his fanbase is primarily composed of poseurs. I don't know you so don't think I'm calling you one

[/ QUOTE ]
see this is better. i was just wondering why you were calling him a piece of [censored] when a simple "i don't like him i think he sucks" would do just fine.

as the review goes, i think he is a little defensive right now because he has been basically in a slump (as far as reviews go)since lullaby.

anyway i don't listen to reviews, i read the book then decide and IMO haunted was way better than stranger than fiction which is the book of his that you would compare it to.

[/ QUOTE ]

I haven't read either of those books. My opinion was formed by reading Choke, Fight Club, Invisible Monsters, and two others. Forgot which, but they weren't the ones you just mentioned.

I generally don't listen to review either. I read all this Palahniuk stuff because I needed to write a paper, knew him to be the author of Fight Club, and chose him. In my research I found the review and it expressed what I felt about his writing better than I ever could have.

[whiskeytown]

Starship Troopers, the book is an incredible work -

the movie is a travesty that bears virtually no resemblance to the book -

RB

[astroglide]

i think starship troopers is a great movie

[Slow Play Ray]

Adaptation is amazing because of the way he did it, Kaufman knew he couldn't make a good movie out of The Orchid Thief, so he did something entirely different...whatever you call what he did.

[swede123]

[ QUOTE ]
Has a movie ever been better than the book its based on?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know about better than the book, but the movie The Shining (the one with Jack, not the TV movie) was and is one of the most effective scary horror movies ever, just like the book is to its genre.

Swede

[imported_The Vibesman]

Generally true, but there are exceptions. Someone noted The Godfather, I've never read the book, but I've heard it's just average. I think "The Outsiders" was a better movie than a book, because Hinton was so young and her writing was so clumsy.

I disagree with whoever said "Fletch," book was a good mystery, the movie was a Chevy Chase vehicle. I like mysteries, though.

I loved the novel, "The Shining," but I'm probably not qualified to judge the movie, as Kubrick makes me physically ill.

I didn't much like the book, "Serpico" but kind of liked the movie. Both seemed pretty average tho.