Anyone here read a book and then watched a movie, and actually found the movie better than the book? I never thought it was possible until I read the Bourne Ultimatum, the book was terrible!!!! I never thought I would actually watch a movie and think they did a better job on it than the actual book.

Anyone here read a book and then watched a movie, and actually found the movie better than the book? I never thought it was possible until I read the Bourne Ultimatum, the book was terrible!!!! I never thought I would actually watch a movie and think they did a better job on it than the actual book.

I hated "The Lord of the Rings" book but found the movie to be great.

~String

Timeline....I love that book, but the movie...fucking Paul walker!?!?!? your killing me!

I thought Jurassic Park was better in the film version than the novel.

Bambi movie was better than the book. I cried a lot lot more.

Solyaris the movie was better than book Solaris.

lotr...is the ony movie better then a book I cant think of

Timeline....I love that book, but the movie...fucking Paul walker!?!?!? your killing me!

agreed that movie sucked!

bourne ultimatum was a bad film, book was better, lord of the rings both excllent books and films, i cant think of a film that was better than the book.


interview with a vampire better book

It's a pretty good indication that the book sucked, if the movie was better.

And it's odd to have a bad book become famous or beloved enough to launch a movie.

So bad books might be easier to film well than good ones - they're simpler, and you can cut still more without losing much, and rewriting all the dialogue doesn't do any damage - nobody misses it. Kind of like bad poetry being easier to translate ?

Ludlum (the Bourne series) is a miserable writer - I've never been able to figure out how he sold so many books. The first movie dropped most of his plot junk, changed the emphasis to something with a little depth, took advantage of the scenery, and improved the dialogue. What's not to like?

"Jaws" was a better movie than book.
"The Lost World"
"The Bridges of Madison County"

interview with a vampire better book

Hmmm. "Interview" was the only Rice book I ever read, and I thought it sucked, but the movie was (IMHO) enjoyable.

"Missery" by King was an amazing book, but the movie just destroyed it.

Also, "The Dune Chronicles" are by far my favorite books, and though the Lynch version chopped it up worse than Freddy Kruger, it still did a pretty good job of capturing the grand nature of the story.

What else... hmmmmmmm. All of the James Bond movies made from the books are better. Flemming is a good writer, but the movies turned out better.

~String

The movie Shooter was an adaptation of a Stephen Hunter book, called Point of Impact, they destroyed the book with that movie.

Clockwork Orange

The movie Shooter was an adaptation of a Stephen Hunter book, called Point of Impact, they destroyed the book with that movie.

Hmm. Well, the movie was fun. I never knew it was a book, though in retrospect, I don't know why it wouldn't be.

~String

Hmm. Well, the movie was fun. I never knew it was a book, though in retrospect, I don't know why it wouldn't be.

~String

If you enjoyed the movie, I would suggest the book. Nothing but fiction, but if you like a lot of action, it is a good read. The main character, IMHO, is a lot like the characters that Clint Eastwood plays.Lots of character depth to him, and a lot of his books interact with each other.