- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Is there any movie that is better than the book?
Posted on 3/13/13 at 11:04 am to wadewilson
Posted on 3/13/13 at 11:04 am to wadewilson
quote:
The Two Towers was a partial birth abortion of the story line.
Yeah i had a feeling LOTR would come up alot. The books beat the ever living shite out of the movies.
1
Posted on 3/13/13 at 11:05 am to Breesus
quote:
I agree, but I enjoyed the tension filled moments with Chigurh better in the book. Its hard for a movie to play on your imagination in a dark hallway or to capture the intentionally evil way he is talking to people. The movie was a good movie, well made. But i liked the book much better.
This is usually how I feel about books made into movies. The exception being if I haven't read the book yet. If I have read the book, I usually have a hard time with the movie. I tend to almost see a mini movie in my head when I read including "casting " certain roles. Thats why , for instance, I was very disappointed to learn that T Cruise was cast as Jack Reacher even though I love Cruise as an actor and the reviews I've read all say the movie was fantastic, it's already ruined for me b/c that's not the Reacher I had in mind when I read the book.
Posted on 3/13/13 at 11:30 am to Breesus
quote:
Yeah i had a feeling LOTR would come up alot. The books beat the ever living shite out of the movies.
People who like the movies better probably never read the books, or read them after they watched the movies.
Even so, I can kinda understand just because of the visual aspect of LOTR. I've never read the book, but do you think you would be as impressed by the novel of The Thin Red Line as you were by the film?
Posted on 3/13/13 at 12:40 pm to jimjackandjose
quote:
A Time to Kill...
UM no
but I might say
Lincoln Lawyer
might also have to consider Sahara,that movie was epic, and I LOVED the book.
Posted on 3/13/13 at 12:44 pm to Baloo
quote:
The Godfather
pretty much the entire career of Alfred Hitchcock
Actually, there's a lot, but that's a good start.
a lot of the James Bond movies
Posted on 3/13/13 at 1:05 pm to Breesus
I would say Jurassic Park.
Posted on 3/13/13 at 1:06 pm to Lacour
quote:
No Country was good, but the book destroys that movie.
The movie is a virtual word for word, scene for scene copy of the novel.
It is but there a couple of story lines in the book that the movie left out, probably so it wouldn't go too long. One of those story lines was about Sheriff Bell as a younger man and it helps make the ending of the movie more understandable. The Coens really should have included it and gone another 10-15 minutes. I'm in the "liked the movie, loved the book" club on this one.
Posted on 3/13/13 at 1:12 pm to BTHog
Let me rephrase... the end of "A time to kill" movie vs the book.
Absolutely hated the woman juror giving the story at the end vs the lawyer.
Absolutely hated the woman juror giving the story at the end vs the lawyer.
Posted on 3/13/13 at 1:15 pm to Breesus
Yes
Posted on 3/13/13 at 1:17 pm to jimjackandjose
quote:
Let me rephrase... the end of "A time to kill" movie vs the book.
Absolutely hated the woman juror giving the story at the end vs the lawyer.
I'll agree with you on that point.
I REALLY wish they would do a movie version of more of Grisham's work . Generally speaking I think they've done very good adaptations so far.
ETA: I might even say Pelican Brief the movie was better than the book.
This post was edited on 3/13/13 at 1:19 pm
Posted on 3/13/13 at 2:01 pm to Breesus
Fight Club
Posted on 3/13/13 at 2:29 pm to Boss
quote:
The Last of the Mohicans
Good one.
Maybe "equal to" but not "better than" is Silence of the Lambs. Only book that scared the shite out of me and the movie still scared me.
Posted on 3/13/13 at 2:39 pm to yurintroubl
I've read The Lord of the rings several times, the hobbit several times, and even the silmarillion. They're great books. That being said, the movies are just as good. IMO it's the only movie franchise that took an already massive famous book series and did it justice. Yea there were some differences but they weren't all bad. For example, no Tom Bombadil scenes the movie. Thank god
Posted on 3/13/13 at 2:40 pm to Brettesaurus Rex
quote:
I would say Jurassic Park.
No way, Jose.
And I love that movie.
Posted on 3/13/13 at 3:57 pm to wadewilson
I read LOTR before I saw the movies and I greatly preferred the movies. The books were just written in a very annoying way to me. Tolkien would go into vivid detail describing every possible detail about some random valley. Everything from the types of trees, to the history of the valley, to the direction of the sun, to the different varieties of animals that inhabited it, ect, 3 pages worth of descriptions of a valley with absolutely nothing occuring in the valley but "and on they walked".
Then, when the story would get to a huge battle Tolkein would cop out of describing it by saying something along the lines of, "The scale of the battle was so massive and indescribable that I'm not going to describe it. The good guys won, so lets move on and talk about this stand of trees in the forest."
It was constantly infuriating. I enjoyed the book "The Hobbit" more than the others because besides copping out on describing "The Battle of the Five Armies", he doesn't do this annoying practice nearly as much.
Then, when the story would get to a huge battle Tolkein would cop out of describing it by saying something along the lines of, "The scale of the battle was so massive and indescribable that I'm not going to describe it. The good guys won, so lets move on and talk about this stand of trees in the forest."
It was constantly infuriating. I enjoyed the book "The Hobbit" more than the others because besides copping out on describing "The Battle of the Five Armies", he doesn't do this annoying practice nearly as much.
Posted on 3/13/13 at 4:03 pm to H-Town Tiger
quote:
a lot of the James Bond movies
None even come close to being adaptations.
Posted on 3/13/13 at 4:24 pm to kingbob
Oh yeah, I got ADD as shite reading the books when I was a kid.
My main gripe with the movies, especially The Two Towers, was some of the events they changed entirely.
My main gripe with the movies, especially The Two Towers, was some of the events they changed entirely.
Posted on 3/13/13 at 4:53 pm to wadewilson
quote:
People who like the movies better probably never read the books
Exactly
quote:
Jurassic Park
Probably the best answer yet.
quote:
Fight Club
I have no idea how so many people are saying this, they must have not read the book. The movie is good but the book is WAY WAY WAY better and it isn't even close!
This post was edited on 3/13/13 at 4:56 pm
Posted on 3/13/13 at 5:28 pm to Breesus
Not many of the movies can match the intensity of Kings' novels, novellas and stories.
The ones that come closest (IMO) are:
The Mist
Stand By Me (based on 'The Body)
The Green Mile
Cat's Eye
Apt Pupil
And of course - a modern masterpiece 'Shawshank'
Reading '11.22.63' now. Should be a great movie.
The ones that come closest (IMO) are:
The Mist
Stand By Me (based on 'The Body)
The Green Mile
Cat's Eye
Apt Pupil
And of course - a modern masterpiece 'Shawshank'
Reading '11.22.63' now. Should be a great movie.
This post was edited on 3/13/13 at 5:29 pm
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News