Movies That Were Better Than Their Books
They always say that the book is better than the book. But is that always the case? I don't think so. Today, because I love lists, I will show you 10 times when this is not true.
As always, they are in no particular order. Of course, this does not consider any books that are rated R. TV series are not eligible for this list.
1) Stardust
I really liked this movie. I actually saw this movie before I read the book, because when I saw it I didn't know that there was a book. I thought it was made up for a movie. There is a book, by Neil Gaiman. He's a great author, but I don't think he was up to his game on this movie. I think it was a very weak book. The movie was well-acted, well-thought, a good story line, with good music and good special effects. But the book was kind of scattered in where the plot was going, and I thought the pacing was very weird. For example, in the book, Yvaine and Tristran (yeah, in the book he's in TristRan not Tristan, he has an extra R and I don't know why), go off into the woods for three weeks, and then they're in love. Literally. Nothing happens. It just says that it's three weeks later, and then they're in love. That's cheating. You need to see how they fall in love, and you have to give them reasons. Plus, the witch gets no comeuppance at the end in the book. There is some value in a villain not getting a comeuppance, but the genre demands that the villain gets their just desserts.
Some complained about the action that was added for the movie, but I think that it worked well with the story and the genre, and enjoyed that tweaking.
2) The Scarlet Pimpernel (Anthony Andrews, Jane Seymour and Ian McKellan)
I grew up with this movie. This movie is hilarious, and the actors pull out the characters fantastically. Ian McKellan even manages to make Chauvelin relatable! But the book didn't have that same feel. It didn't dwell on the romance, and I think that was a discredit to the story, because that piece is so important and the conflict that that brings makes the story. It didn't have quite the same inventiveness with the Pimpernel's foppish qualities, and just lost the freedom of that character.
The biggest issue with the book, however, is that the League of the Scarlet Pimpernel doesn't really seem to have a direction. They seem to be saving aristocrats because they were bored and had nothing else to do, and felt a little like they were a crowd of middle-school boys. Yes, they get some motivation in Eldorado and The Illusive Pimpernel with the dauphin plot, but they still don't seem to have much of an end goal.
3) The Notebook
This is hard to put on the list, because neither is good. They're both terrible. But, I always hated the movie, but I was told the book was better. I generally don't like to watch a movie before the book, but I watched this in my apartment with my roommates when I was in undergrad.
However, someone told me that the book was better. And I had to give it a chance. And I did. But, it was terrible too. It's an unhealthy relationship and saccharine-sweet.
But, the sappiness is just a bit toned down in the movie, and Ryan Gosling's gorgeous face will throw this movie just over the book.
4) The Princess Bride
Opposite problem of The Notebook. The movie is one of the best movies, and the book was really great too. In the book, however, the prose got a little convoluted at times, and I think that since William Goldman wrote the script as well, I think the movie changes are things that William Goldman would have changed anyways if he could have gone back and rewritten the book. So I have no shame.
5) Breakfast at Tiffany's
Truman Capote was weird. Full stop. The novella had no resolution, and not in a good way. It simply made no sense. But the movie brought the theme of chronic independence to a tied up place. The novella just got too esoteric and a bit lost.
6) How To Train Your Dragon
Didn't know this had a book series originally, but I loved this movie. Absolutely adored this movie. I loved the story, I loved the characters, I loved the themes. I honestly don't know how the music didn't win its Academy Award that year. So, when I learned that there was book series, I was so excited to read it. Especially since I really do enjoy children's books. But I read it, and found that it was just one of those books that is devised to get tween boys to read (as if there's inherent value in just reading regardless of what it is, like all literature is equal). I don't agree with that. There is no "at least they're reading." It belongs in the Captain Underpants genre. Tons of potty-humor, no plot, no value. Just skip the books.
7) The Divergent Series
I love dystopia, I love YA dystopia. I don't think it's overdone. But Divergent is an insult to the name of Dystopia. The characters aren't likeable. There's no polisci value. There's no understanding of poltiical structure or social psychology, and it's not well-written. The movies are marginally better. Some people claim that Insurgent deviated too far from the books, but I think that was a good thing. They made Insurgent better. There is only one thing I take issue with in their adaptation and that's the way that execution works in the Dauntless faction because that was one of the only things that Veronica Roth did well and had any dystopian analysis connected to it. Yes, I did read the books before the movies. And I hated them. But the movies started to redeem themselves.
8) Catch Me If You Can
This is difficult because it's non-fiction. There were some things that were cut I was sad about, but when all is said and done, I think the movie captured the excitement better. They tweaked it a bit for the movie, which you can't do for a non-fiction book, but they made it a bit more fun. This isn't a bash on the book, the book was good too, but they hyped it up a bit in the movie. Yes, as a graduate of BYU, I would have found it fun for them to have included that Frank Abagnale in real life posed as an Anthropology professor at BYU without anyone figuring it out.
9) A River Runs Through It
I know some of this is semi-autobiographical, and maybe this is why the book creates an energy of the author desperately trying to make it make sense. In the movie, they just acknowledged that the actions of his brother don't make sense. And yes, I have criticized things for not having a coherent wrap-up, but in this case, it was a beautiful not making sense. It was a cathartic and relatable story in the movie because of that the acknowledgement that there was no logic.
10) Master and Commander
I enjoy the books, but the movie is better. It made it a story. I haven't read all of the series, though I intend to, but the books commonly get completely bogged down in the gritty details of maritime history. Too bogged down. It's great that the author knows all the parts of a boat in the Early Nineteenth Century (Not going to say Napoleonic, because though it's Napoleonic in the movie, it's mostly War of 1812 in the book). But even though the author needs that background, I don't think your readers care quite that much about all the ins and outs of maritime life. It just got to be a little difficult to read. Not in a higher level way, in a needing more editing way. I liked both, but the movies might be better (and I loved the music, even though it's classical music adaptations). I'm surprised that they didn't make more of the movie series. But there you have it.
And there are ten movies that I found better than the book. Have a nice day.
As always, they are in no particular order. Of course, this does not consider any books that are rated R. TV series are not eligible for this list.
1) Stardust
I really liked this movie. I actually saw this movie before I read the book, because when I saw it I didn't know that there was a book. I thought it was made up for a movie. There is a book, by Neil Gaiman. He's a great author, but I don't think he was up to his game on this movie. I think it was a very weak book. The movie was well-acted, well-thought, a good story line, with good music and good special effects. But the book was kind of scattered in where the plot was going, and I thought the pacing was very weird. For example, in the book, Yvaine and Tristran (yeah, in the book he's in TristRan not Tristan, he has an extra R and I don't know why), go off into the woods for three weeks, and then they're in love. Literally. Nothing happens. It just says that it's three weeks later, and then they're in love. That's cheating. You need to see how they fall in love, and you have to give them reasons. Plus, the witch gets no comeuppance at the end in the book. There is some value in a villain not getting a comeuppance, but the genre demands that the villain gets their just desserts.
Some complained about the action that was added for the movie, but I think that it worked well with the story and the genre, and enjoyed that tweaking.
2) The Scarlet Pimpernel (Anthony Andrews, Jane Seymour and Ian McKellan)
I grew up with this movie. This movie is hilarious, and the actors pull out the characters fantastically. Ian McKellan even manages to make Chauvelin relatable! But the book didn't have that same feel. It didn't dwell on the romance, and I think that was a discredit to the story, because that piece is so important and the conflict that that brings makes the story. It didn't have quite the same inventiveness with the Pimpernel's foppish qualities, and just lost the freedom of that character.
The biggest issue with the book, however, is that the League of the Scarlet Pimpernel doesn't really seem to have a direction. They seem to be saving aristocrats because they were bored and had nothing else to do, and felt a little like they were a crowd of middle-school boys. Yes, they get some motivation in Eldorado and The Illusive Pimpernel with the dauphin plot, but they still don't seem to have much of an end goal.
3) The Notebook
This is hard to put on the list, because neither is good. They're both terrible. But, I always hated the movie, but I was told the book was better. I generally don't like to watch a movie before the book, but I watched this in my apartment with my roommates when I was in undergrad.
However, someone told me that the book was better. And I had to give it a chance. And I did. But, it was terrible too. It's an unhealthy relationship and saccharine-sweet.
But, the sappiness is just a bit toned down in the movie, and Ryan Gosling's gorgeous face will throw this movie just over the book.
4) The Princess Bride
Opposite problem of The Notebook. The movie is one of the best movies, and the book was really great too. In the book, however, the prose got a little convoluted at times, and I think that since William Goldman wrote the script as well, I think the movie changes are things that William Goldman would have changed anyways if he could have gone back and rewritten the book. So I have no shame.
5) Breakfast at Tiffany's
Truman Capote was weird. Full stop. The novella had no resolution, and not in a good way. It simply made no sense. But the movie brought the theme of chronic independence to a tied up place. The novella just got too esoteric and a bit lost.
6) How To Train Your Dragon
Didn't know this had a book series originally, but I loved this movie. Absolutely adored this movie. I loved the story, I loved the characters, I loved the themes. I honestly don't know how the music didn't win its Academy Award that year. So, when I learned that there was book series, I was so excited to read it. Especially since I really do enjoy children's books. But I read it, and found that it was just one of those books that is devised to get tween boys to read (as if there's inherent value in just reading regardless of what it is, like all literature is equal). I don't agree with that. There is no "at least they're reading." It belongs in the Captain Underpants genre. Tons of potty-humor, no plot, no value. Just skip the books.
7) The Divergent Series
I love dystopia, I love YA dystopia. I don't think it's overdone. But Divergent is an insult to the name of Dystopia. The characters aren't likeable. There's no polisci value. There's no understanding of poltiical structure or social psychology, and it's not well-written. The movies are marginally better. Some people claim that Insurgent deviated too far from the books, but I think that was a good thing. They made Insurgent better. There is only one thing I take issue with in their adaptation and that's the way that execution works in the Dauntless faction because that was one of the only things that Veronica Roth did well and had any dystopian analysis connected to it. Yes, I did read the books before the movies. And I hated them. But the movies started to redeem themselves.
8) Catch Me If You Can
This is difficult because it's non-fiction. There were some things that were cut I was sad about, but when all is said and done, I think the movie captured the excitement better. They tweaked it a bit for the movie, which you can't do for a non-fiction book, but they made it a bit more fun. This isn't a bash on the book, the book was good too, but they hyped it up a bit in the movie. Yes, as a graduate of BYU, I would have found it fun for them to have included that Frank Abagnale in real life posed as an Anthropology professor at BYU without anyone figuring it out.
9) A River Runs Through It
I know some of this is semi-autobiographical, and maybe this is why the book creates an energy of the author desperately trying to make it make sense. In the movie, they just acknowledged that the actions of his brother don't make sense. And yes, I have criticized things for not having a coherent wrap-up, but in this case, it was a beautiful not making sense. It was a cathartic and relatable story in the movie because of that the acknowledgement that there was no logic.
10) Master and Commander
I enjoy the books, but the movie is better. It made it a story. I haven't read all of the series, though I intend to, but the books commonly get completely bogged down in the gritty details of maritime history. Too bogged down. It's great that the author knows all the parts of a boat in the Early Nineteenth Century (Not going to say Napoleonic, because though it's Napoleonic in the movie, it's mostly War of 1812 in the book). But even though the author needs that background, I don't think your readers care quite that much about all the ins and outs of maritime life. It just got to be a little difficult to read. Not in a higher level way, in a needing more editing way. I liked both, but the movies might be better (and I loved the music, even though it's classical music adaptations). I'm surprised that they didn't make more of the movie series. But there you have it.
And there are ten movies that I found better than the book. Have a nice day.
Comments