OT- Best/Worst movies adapted from books.
Best- The Shawshank Redemption. Took an entertaining short story and made some subtle, but significant, changes to it. Then added in a first rate cast and powerful visual and audio elements. The result being one of the all time classics of cinema.
Worst- The Firm. The novel was a great story of deception and betrayal that was packed with intrigue and suspense right up to the very end. The film stayed more or less true to the book for the first hour, but then took the story in such a totally different direction that it defied description. Culminating in a climax so unbelievably comical you could almost hear the “womp, womp” as it played out. Not even a top flight cast could redeem this turd.
"The Treasure of the Sierra Madre" movie is better than the novel. "The Maltese Falcon" is the best and most faithful film adaptation of a novel. Thank you for both, John Huston and Humphrey Bogart!
Both very good movies! I'm a big Humphrey Bogart fan.
The Narnia movies are extremely well-adapted. Even better than LOTR. LOTR is the better actual movie and is exquisitely, almost perfectly adapted. But Narnia is an even better adaptation, because the source material is short enough to fit the whole book into a movie.
Lost World.....well, I read that book ages ago and didn't find it nearly as memorable as Jurassic Park. I don't remember too much of it. But I certainly don't remember a plot that required so much abject stupidity from the protagonists in order to work. Fitting that the screenwriter inserted himself into the movie doing something incredibly stupid and getting eaten as a result. If that movie hadn't had dinosaurs, it would've made about $3 at the box office.
Jaws took a schlocky piece of summer read trash and made a classic movie out of it. The Guns of Navarone and The Bridge on the River Kwai were excellent war movies adapted from novels. And always liked the original 1954 version of 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.
Battlefield Earth was a decent book, but huge and sprawling. Trying to make a movie out of it was a disaster in the making, and it got made.
Outing myself as a nerd here. The film versions of "The Hobbit" were a violation of the text. I felt dirty walking out of the theater after those.
Yep...too much Peter Jackson and too little Tolkien. Still haven't been able to force myself to watch the last one.
I don't really blame Peter Jackson for what's bad about the Hobbit movies. I liked those movies. They weren't fit to loosen the sandal straps of the LOTR movies, which may be the best movies of all time, but I liked them anyway. A two movie series was in the works, and studio execs ordered three, because they knew we'd go see them all anyway.
Two movies would've been perfect. A lot of stuff they had to add to fit three movies' worth of material was really good. Like actually showing Gandalf going to the tower to investigate Sauron instead of the book's "I must go on a MacGuffin hunt so that you will not have the powerful wizard to kill the dragon with one flick of his staff." Or the extra scenes of Bard the Bowman. A lot of the extra stuff was obviously boring filler. Get rid of the filler and you have two really good movies.
I do agree the White Council looking into the Necromancer was a good add. It's actually a fit with the text, with artistic license of course, which only mentions it fleetingly. That's opposed to much of the other things added which required of Peter Jackson a rubber glove and a great degree of flexibility.
I do agree the White Council looking into the Necromancer was a good add. It's actually a fit with the text, with artistic license of course, which only mentions it fleetingly. That's opposed to much of the other things added which required of Peter Jackson a rubber glove and a great degree of flexibility.
Some great choices mentioned so far. I'll throw out another option that is a bit more obscure: Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
I saw the movie first, then read the book, then watched the movie again more recently. I thoroughly enjoyed both. Gary Oldman was phenomenal in the movie. I am now embarking on a full La Carre journey in chronological order.
Worst? Fifty Shades of Grey. I actually haven't read the book(s) or seen the movie(s), but I assume they're equally wretched.
The Green Mile was such a great series of books and the movie was exceptional.
Scorsese’s film version of “The Age of Innocence” is a wonderful adaptation of a great, great novel.
I’m still hoping for a film version of “A Confederacy of Dunces.”
Most Michael Crichton books not named Jurassic Park were better as novels than films. Timeline, Eaters of the Dead, Congo weren't great books (though I think Congo was harrowing), but the movies were far worse. Disclosure was a weird book and an even weirder movie, so I consider that a wash.
I loved his book The Sphere when I read it in Jr High, so when the movie came out I had to go see it right away. It's been a while but it was generally close to the book if I remember right. Left out a ton of stuff just like they did with Jurassic Park, but I remember walking out of the theater thinking they did a decent job staying true to the book. I'm afraid to go watch it again for fear that it'll suck ass.
I never saw the movie so I didn't list it, but that doesn't surprise me that it was reasonably faithful. It's a book that lends itself to film.
Have you read Prey? That's one of my favorite Crichton books. It's about as adaptable as a book can be. I'm amazed it hasn't been made into a movie.
Crichton had a way of making a compelling story out of abstract scientific subjects. His prose weren't necessarily the greatest but he had a unique storytelling ability. It's really a shame he died.
I read a lot of books, most of those that get adapted, and I am a film nerd too. I get annoyed when other book readers claim the book was better. Film and novel are different mediums and should be judged for how they performed in their languages. That said, here are some incomplete lists:
Great Adaptations of Mediocre Source Material:
- The Lord of the Rings Trilogy. Tolkien began the genre and set the tropes, but the genre has gotten way better since his meandering steps into high fantasy. To this day I find it incredible these films ever got made.
- Jurassic Park. Crichton is great at premises, then he tells the same damn story again of a muscular brainy man who adapts to the premise, followed by a long chase scene. The movie is a top-ten all-timer.
- Shawshank Redemption. A classic based on a short story that had but a fifth of the elements.
- The Shining. While we're on King, it remains endlessly fascinating to me that Kubrick--who obsesses over every detail--made this out of a novel by Stephen King, who is the one author in Americana you can trust to take a good idea for a book, (and a lot of cocaine) and spit out a functional novel that won't stand up to a microscope. The book is vintage King. The film is the best of both geniuses.
- First Six Seasons of Game of Thrones/A Song of Ice & Fire: The god-awful final two seasons that ruined the greatest political drama on television by turning it into a rushed character drama are not adaptations so let's stick to the parts they did adapt. That said, I never thought George RR Martin was a good writer--of all the fantasy books I read post college I was surprised this one got the big HBO treatment while Terry Pratchett and Robert Jordan sit in ordinary. The changes the show made (before the last season) were necessary. The story elements and rich world were all there, but the characters are all sterile in the books. The magnificent cast brought this series to life.
- Band of Brothers. For all he's celebrated for bringing the experience of WWII soldiers to a new generation, Stephen A. Ambrose is more of a propagandist than a historian, and you have to take his writing with the skepticism you'd save for Pravda. The HBO Miniseries is one of the greatest works ever produced for television.
- One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Do yourself a favor and do not ever think to yourself "Oh, I love that movie; I bet the book is great!" The book is told from Chief Bromden's perspective--yeah, like I said, don't bother.
- Mary Poppins. Because they made a movie about it now everybody knows Walt Disney was obsessed with getting the rights to PL Travers's children's books, and Travers hated the adaptation. You might have read that story one time and thought "Oh, I should get the originals for my kids who love the Disney classic." Don't do this. They are prim, stuffy, and horribly dated. I can see why Walt (and Queen Elizabeth II) swear by them, because they're right up their alleys.
Great Adaptations of Great Source Material
- Master & Commander: The Far Side of the World. This one pains me because I loved reading the Aubrey-Maturin novels and by making just one movie out of them they squashed the franchise. But those are not easy novels to read: you have to pick up the language and that takes awhile. Once you're in however, oh you are IN. POB throws you into the deep end with every detail of that world present and important to understand, and that made for a historical fiction experience nobody would dare attempt today. If you've ever read a book in a foreign language, it's like that: you see things about your own world differently because your brain is freed from its biases by having to exist in a different world with different rules and values. The movie is a very different thing: it's a simple, concise period piece that I love.
- V for Vendetta. I have only read maybe 10 graphic novels in my life but this is a standard-bearer. It supposes you're well-versed in Reagan-Thatcher world that I was too young to understand, but since that world made a comeback recently I recommend people pick it up because there are subtleties you would have missed before 2016. The movie is more accessible and makes some curious decisions that fans of the source material didn't like, but there are few better anti-establishment touchstones that are also compelling stories, and this one stands alone for its time.
- Galaxy Quest/Star Trek. No it's not cheating: Galaxy Quest is the best Star Trek movie and I'll defend that to the death.
- The Hunger Games. We have this unfortunate tendency in our culture over the last 20 years to treat self-aware teen boy media as acceptable "popcorn fare" even if it's completely stupid (e.g. Transformers) but self-aware media for teenage girls (e.g. Twilight) as icky and awful. What happens when you merge the two genres? Suzanne Collins. No, it's not as deep and layered as adult post-apocalyptic fiction, but the books are well-paced, concise, well-imagined, and perfectly suited for the generation that read Harry Potter as kids and are not yet old enough for Original Syn or The Road. The movies are in the same spirit as the books, and grate adults because of their whiny teenagerness because they're made for teens and not hiding it. Appreciating both on their own terms I think they're both great, and the pushback they get is mostly due to people who aren't its core audience who aren't used to not being the core audience of the media they consume.
Awful Adaptations of Great Source Material
- The Hobbit. I cannot add to Lindsay Ellis's The Hobbit: A Long-Expected Autopsy (1/2), The Hobbit: The Battle of Five Studios (2/2) and The Hobbit: The Desolation of Warners (3/2)
- Batman v Superman/The Dark Knight Returns: BvsS used enough of Frank Miller's classic--the best graphic novel ever produced IMO--that they can't now make a true adaptation. That's fine because I have yet to rate any DC movie since The Dark Knight above just-okay..in fact I think Shazam is the only one I found entertaining at all. DC's attempts to be Marvel are pathetic and I wish they would stop. The graphic novel by the way also expects you to be well-versed in Reagan-Thatcher politics.
- The Dark Tower. There are issues with King's herky-jerky magnum opus, but over all of those books there aren't nearly as many mistakes as the film makes in the first five minutes. I never even bothered to find out how they got this so wrong because I didn't want to spend any more time thinking about it; I imagine this is just the classic example of studio suits who didn't know what they had.
- Earthsea. Speaking of...You probably missed the Sci-Fi Channel's miniseries because it came out juuuust before DVRs or television production companies that put more money and thought into their shows because they have a life on DVD afterwards. You should keep it that way, but you should definitely pick up the Ursula Le Guin series, which is biting and sweet and so modern in its views on race and politics you'll be like How did this come out in the 1970s? Just ignore the whitewashed miniseries.
I haven't seen A Wrinkle in Time (one of my childhood favorites) yet but I hear it's bad.
Bad Source Material/Bad Movies
- Northern Lights/The Golden Compass. The book is a vehicle for a certain detestable brand of pedantic atheism that is annoying enough when it's coming from your dabbles-in-communism friend who's got a point and wants to drive it as deep as possible. Simpletons relate it to C.S. Lewis because they're both fantasy worlds made for 8- to 10-year-olds centered in Oxford. But Lewis is all about instilling the idea of wonder (as a vehicle to theism) and imagination and symbolism in a world that was losing these things as we embraced Enlightenment thinking as the only thinking. Pullman is all about eradicating the C.S. Lewis from Lewisian fantasy. The film is "WAR BEARS!"
- Cloud Atlas. I'm here for your arguments (actually I'm not). The book gets too much credit for trying something new and not enough criticism for not at all pulling it off. Making a movie from that was a bad idea, but they got Tom Hanks so...NOPE Tom Hanks has the weakest part in this movie. But Hugh Grant is underrated.
- Cats. As a play it's something between an accidental commentary on the state of modern theater, an excuse for excessively manicured drama mamas to romp around like furries, and a spectacular troll of the Broadway establishment. The film is so easy make fun of, the people still getting trolled by the existence of the play are still trolling themselves by doing so. Disclaimer: I have not seen the cat buttholes cut.
Wish I had time to extend this list. Also wish I had a place to put this:
The Gamers. The Gamers was made by some college kids and in certain circles the existence of this videocassette was a legend. You can watch it on YouTube for free right now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSynJyq2RRo and no you don't have to have played D&D to get it just liked you don't have to have played World of Warcraft to get Leroy Jenkins.
I wish you had put more work into this list
Holy moly. That made me feel bad about spending most of my furlough drinking, doing drugs and playing video games. Unreal effort, Seth.
Anyway, I was trying to find something to disagree with in your list (that I have read/watched) and came up empty.
I now remember why I started writing this. As a sci-fi fan, what are are two or three suggestions for new (last couple years) books you like in the genre? Just reread starship troopers and am about to do the same with Dune.
Any ideas for me? much appreciated.
https://www.amazon.com/Original-Syn-Beth-Kander/dp/1947003992
The author is originally from Fenton, Michigan.
How could I forget about Band of Brothers? Great addition to the positive side of the book/movie ledger.
Admire the effort but holy god are your takes just flat-out BAD. And it's not about your selections, 99% of which I completely agree with. But, and I realize this probably jeopardizes my account, Mr. Seth you come off as the most pompous of fart sniffers in existence. If your blurbs here were presented as full critiques they would instantly be held up as examples of why critics are useless ivory tower pedants. Tolkien is a mediocre meanderer into a genre he single-handedly made a thing???? Promoting Lindsey Ellis??? My god man.
But the high-horsedness also makes you possibly the most stereotypical Michigan fan in existence as well, so good on ya haha.
When I was little, I was delighted to discover a whole series of Mary Poppins books in the library. I think I ended up reading two of them. On one level it's a shame that P.L. Travers disapproved so strongly of the movie. But on another level, the movie Mary Poppins is someone that, as an 8-year-old, you'd definitely want as a nanny, and the book Mary Poppins is stiff, severe, and apparently about as interested in children as Katie Nanna. It was kind of a turnoff.
Re: Game of Thrones, I think the characters are only sterile in the books because the series did such an amazing job of bringing them to life. Not the fault of the books. Martin can't help it if the actors in that series did basically the best acting jobs of all time.
The Lord of the Rings text as "mediocre" source material?!? I have just taken off my virtual glove and slapped your face with it.
Why hasn’t Confederacy of Dunces been made into a movie?
Read that for a lit class at Michigan. An immediate favorite.
showing my age here, but i loved tom wolfe's 'bonfire of the vanities' when it came out. it does NOT hold up, so don't waste your time, but the movie - with a spectacular cast - was unwatchable. it'd be interesting to go back and watch it, but i don't hate myself that much.
back in the day i also liked 'atlas shrugged' without realizing that it was an unrelenting load of melodramatic, sanctimonious, hypocritical shit shit shit. then i, you know, grew up. god it's terrible, honestly one of the worst books ever not thrown into a landfill.
so i hatewatched the 2011 movie a couple years ago, and, believe it or not, it's WAY worse.
I have only a best category. Mine really takes what I think is an excellent book and turns it into a genius movie of the same title. One Flew Over The Cuckoos Nest. The casting and acting in the movie were spot on.
Basically every Stephen King novel. Not that the books were bad, but the people who put it on film were trash.
Best: The Natural (1984), starring Robert Redford.
Even though the movie has a different ending than the book, I think it's outstanding.
They butchered the Percy Jackson movies. Could have easily made 10-12 movies out of it...but nah. Fucked it up.
Heard the musical is great though.
Fight Club was a great adaptation of Chuck Paluhniuk's book of the same title and had masterful perfromance from a fantastic lineup of actors. Also a hat tip to all that listed Into the Wild. Makes me want to read the book again.
Good movies based on books (or short stories) not yet mentioned.
Contact.
Das Boot.
Lawrence of Arabia.
Grave of the Fireflies.
Total Recall.
Starship Troopers. Movie not much like the book, but I liked both.
Downfall.
The Dead Zone. Loved the movie, which is way better than the book.
September 12th, 2020 at 3:14 AM ^
There are a lot of good movies that were better than books. But I think that we always need to read the original first and then and only then watch the movie. I've been reading my favorite books on PDF Mania. It can give the possibility to download books on my iPhone for free. Such a great service.