Movies Based on Books...

[wh1t3bread]

With "Jarhead" (based on a book) coming out this weekend it got me thinking...

Are there any movies that you have seen that are based on novels that you liked better than the book?

I was thinking maybe "Jurassic Park"? Maybe a Steven King piece, like "The Shawshank Redemption"? "Band of Brothers" definitely crossed my mind but I dismissed that for being a mini-series and not a movie. Can a case be made for "Lord of the Rings" or "Harry Potter" (I haven't read either)? Wasn't "Apocalypse Now" based on a book? "2001: A Space Odessey"? .....

no case can be made for lord of the rings, especially because they left out the single most important part of book three...

as far as ones taht are better than the book... damn, I really cant think of any.

I know all of the crichton books were better.

Im thinking we may have a shot at a particularly good movie version of a stephen king book?

suggestions?

[krazyace5]

I have never seen a movie that was as good as the book.

[wh1t3bread]

[ QUOTE ]

Im thinking we may have a shot at a particularly good movie version of a stephen king book?


[/ QUOTE ]

I think you might be right. How about The Green Mile or The Shining?

[SoCalRugger]

Jurassic Park was a good movie, but the book was much better. Same thing for Lord of the Rings.

Maybe Bourne Identity/Supremacy? The movies were pretty good. But it's been so long since I've read the books that I can't really compare the two.

A Christmas Story. I didn't like the book it was based upon at all.

[wh1t3bread]

[ QUOTE ]

Maybe Bourne Identity/Supremacy?


[/ QUOTE ]

This crossed my mind as well. I never read them but I heard the books were really good.

[ QUOTE ]

A Christmas Story.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't know this was a book, but this movie is awesome.

[lapoker17]

A few of the Grisham movies were fairly well done.

Gotta think some James Bond is close.

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
no case can be made for lord of the rings, especially because they left out the single most important part of book three...


[/ QUOTE ]

In general, the movies were better than a straight adaptation of the book would have been. I missed Tom Bombadil and the Scouring of the Shire too, and they would have been welcome additions, but there were many other choices made that worked better for the film than a direct

No, I don't think a book adaptation of the films would be better than the original books. What works better in print does not always work better on the screen, and vice versa.

In that sense, I think the films are better than a video-book would have been.

~D

[HtotheNootch]

[ QUOTE ]
I have never seen a movie that was as good as the book.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Godfather maybe?

[BadBoyBenny]

Shawshank.

Generally if a book is more than 150 pages then it will be better than the movie. Shawshank was a novella and if I remember right, it seemed almost word for word in it's adaptation. Morgan Freeman sounded better than my imaginary narrator in my head.