Book or Movie?

[sledge13]

Jaws - the film no contest, read the book a few years after and it was more like a soap with Hoopers affair and pretty lame ending...though obv we owe a lot to the book in the first place.

[PocketLady]

In general I prefer reading the book to watching the film of a particular story.  So much more detail, plus they always change something to make it more "viewer friendly" and often it's things that don't need to be changed, they just do it because they think it will fill the cinemas more.  Like The Da Vinci Code, they completely changed the ending of the film to-, well I don't quite know why they changed it, but I didn't like it.

Hang on.  There's a wind up here

bhoywonder said :

Twas strange watching the da vinci code i thought,after reading the book.it followed the book to the letter,at least they could have changed the ending,just for a surprise.

I know I'm having one of my non comprendo days, but ........

The ending was different.  Don't want to say how it was different in case I spoil it for anyone that hasn't read it, but basically they changed one bit to make it more dramatic.  Probably so we all go "ahhh" when we see it for the first time.

[vegaslover]

Much prefer books to the films, always far better story.
Some films are probably very good if you haven't read the book beforehand.

[ShatnerPants]

What about Ludlum's Bourne trilogy.  I read the books a few ( ? ) years ago, and enjoyed them, coz there was a certain tension going on as I recall.  But the films were just Bond on speed.

Hugely disapointing.

But they did have Matt Damon in them. So no major shock there.  Damon's only done one decent film, that suits his slightly degen collegeboy gone bad look.   IMHO of course )

( As an aside, when you say the name 'Matt Damon' Do you do it in the stylee of ''Team America - World Police'' ? )

[Hairydude]

What about Ludlum's Bourne trilogy.  I read the books a few ( ? ) years ago, and enjoyed them, coz there was a certain tension going on as I recall.  But the films were just Bond on speed.

Hugely disapointing.

But they did have Matt Damon in them. So no major shock there.  Damon's only done one decent film, that suits his slightly degen collegeboy gone bad look.   IMHO of course )

( As an aside, when you say the name 'Matt Damon' Do you do it in the stylee of ''Team America - World Police'' ? )

The bourne Trilogy is awesome and Matt Damon is the mutts nuts(IMO of course)

[PocketLady]

One thing I would say is that a lot of Stephen King adaptations are really good.  There is no way you are going to get the kind of detail in a film as you would in a Stephen King novel, but for some reason I really like them.  The Stand and IT spring to mind.  Great books and great films.

[NoflopsHomer]

In general I prefer reading the book to watching the film of a particular story.  So much more detail, plus they always change something to make it more "viewer friendly" and often it's things that don't need to be changed, they just do it because they think it will fill the cinemas more.  Like The Da Vinci Code, they completely changed the ending of the film to-, well I don't quite know why they changed it, but I didn't like it.

Hang on.  There's a wind up here

bhoywonder said :

Twas strange watching the da vinci code i thought,after reading the book.it followed the book to the letter,at least they could have changed the ending,just for a surprise.

I know I'm having one of my non comprendo days, but ........

The ending was different.  Don't want to say how it was different in case I spoil it for anyone that hasn't read it, but basically they changed one bit to make it more dramatic.  Probably so we all go "ahhh" when we see it for the first time.

The Da Vinci Code is one of the worst books I've ever tried to read. It sucked on so many levels.

[Pawprint]

If you've seen the film 21 and enjoyed that, I would still recommend reading the Ben Mezrich book, and any of his others for that matter.

[lazaroonie]

like Trainspotting, i read the book on someone recommendation, then a few months later, along came the movie. thats fine. the movie was good, but seemed a lot lighter than the book.

But the problem is, then he bloomin well wrote the sequel, which I enjoyed immensely, but now had an image in my head of Ewan McGregor, Bobby Carlyle etc. Filmstars, not the real characters - real "leith gadgies". (im sure geo will be along in a minute to correct my geography of the port area.....)

[Rod Paradise]

PAPILLON

Brilliant descriptive book.............great film

Book wins every time as a persons imagination is perfect whereas a directors interpretation could never match that perfection

Totally agree.

Certain films (the Lord of the Rings Trilogy for example) - impresss me purely because they even approach the books for the pictures in my head. Then you get a cheap film about your favorite book ever (the Power of One - Bryce Courtenay) and they massacre it .

BOOKS FTW!!!!

[Ginger]

One thing I would say is that a lot of Stephen King adaptations are really good.  There is no way you are going to get the kind of detail in a film as you would in a Stephen King novel, but for some reason I really like them.  The Stand and IT spring to mind.  Great books and great films.

I couldn't disagree with this more! Yes, Stephen King books are IMO fantastic, I'm a huge fan (not his No.1 fan, I'm happy to say though...) I've nearly all his work apart from a couple of the Dark Tower series. Sadly, and I know I'm not alone in this opinion, his adaptations are some of the worst about. You cannot convey the imagery that exist in his work onto film, it simply can't be done.   

That's not to say that the films can be great in their own right (think Shawshank, Green Mile, Stand By Me... ), but I would never recommend anyone to watch a film because it was a great book, they don't and can't  scratch the surface, or they end up a rather embarrassing hash up (think IT, Christine, Dreamcatcher...)

SO imo... All great books, a few/some great films, unfortunately a large amount of rubbish.

[relaedgc]

PAPILLON

Brilliant descriptive book.............great film

Book wins every time as a persons imagination is perfect whereas a directors interpretation could never match that perfection

Totally agree.

Certain films (the Lord of the Rings Trilogy for example) - impresss me purely because they even approach the books for the pictures in my head. Then you get a cheap film about your favorite book ever (the Power of One - Bryce Courtenay) and they massacre it .

BOOKS FTW!!!!

I enjoyed the LotR movies, but they annihilated so many aspects of the works by J.R.R Tolkien. Some of the major battles they just completely made up, for instance. There were no Elves at Helm's Deep. The films haven't even scratched the surface of the books, and they were -good- movies. A book is always going to trump a film

[mondatoo]

What about Ludlum's Bourne trilogy.  I read the books a few ( ? ) years ago, and enjoyed them, coz there was a certain tension going on as I recall.  But the films were just Bond on speed.

Hugely disapointing.

But they did have Matt Damon in them. So no major shock there.  Damon's only done one decent film, that suits his slightly degen collegeboy gone bad look.   IMHO of course )

( As an aside, when you say the name 'Matt Damon' Do you do it in the stylee of ''Team America - World Police'' ? )

The bourne Trilogy is awesome and Matt Damon is the mutts nuts(IMO of course)

I agree watched all 3 in 1 day was immense.

[Joobie538]

One thing I would say is that a lot of Stephen King adaptations are really good.  There is no way you are going to get the kind of detail in a film as you would in a Stephen King novel, but for some reason I really like them.  The Stand and IT spring to mind.  Great books and great films.

I couldn't disagree with this more! Yes, Stephen King books are IMO fantastic, I'm a huge fan (not his No.1 fan, I'm happy to say though...) I've nearly all his work apart from a couple of the Dark Tower series. Sadly, and I know I'm not alone in this opinion, his adaptations are some of the worst about. You cannot convey the imagery that exist in his work onto film, it simply can't be done.   

That's not to say that the films can be great in their own right (think Shawshank, Green Mile, Stand By Me... ), but I would never recommend anyone to watch a film because it was a great book, they don't and can't  scratch the surface, or they end up a rather embarrassing hash up (think IT, Christine, Dreamcatcher...)

SO imo... All great books, a few/some great films, unfortunately a large amount of rubbish.

I'm a huge fan, but i agree after reading the books the films are ALWAYS a total let down, what really annoys me is when they change the ending! ( Cujo, dreamcatcher and 1408. I fell asleep during tommyknockers so couldn't say if the ending was the same) 

currently watching needful things (why do i keep doing this to myself) read the book about 8 years ago thought it would be fun to watch the movie - i was wrong!

[Claw75]

One thing I would say is that a lot of Stephen King adaptations are really good.  There is no way you are going to get the kind of detail in a film as you would in a Stephen King novel, but for some reason I really like them.  The Stand and IT spring to mind.  Great books and great films.

I couldn't disagree with this more! Yes, Stephen King books are IMO fantastic, I'm a huge fan (not his No.1 fan, I'm happy to say though...) I've nearly all his work apart from a couple of the Dark Tower series. Sadly, and I know I'm not alone in this opinion, his adaptations are some of the worst about. You cannot convey the imagery that exist in his work onto film, it simply can't be done.   

That's not to say that the films can be great in their own right (think Shawshank, Green Mile, Stand By Me... ), but I would never recommend anyone to watch a film because it was a great book, they don't and can't  scratch the surface, or they end up a rather embarrassing hash up (think IT, Christine, Dreamcatcher...)

SO imo... All great books, a few/some great films, unfortunately a large amount of rubbish.

I've not read the Green Mile, but the film was excellent imo.  I think one of the reasons Stand by Me and Shawshank translated so well to film was because they were shorter stories they didn't suffer from the usual problem with adaptations where loads of what was in the book had to be left out of the film.

Two others that spring to mind where books and films were both very good are Silence of the Lambs and Schindler's Ark/List