Off Topic: Better Than The Book?

11 years ago

April 16, 2013 at 11:15 am

Last night I was watching Game of Thrones, like many of you I suspect, and it suddenly started to dawn on me that I really, really much prefer the TV show to the books. Where the books are bloated and (in my opinion) clunkily written, the show is lean and slick. The performances are perfect and there’s a real sense of drama and timing to the whole thing. It got me wondering: can anyone else think of a situation where the movie or TV adaptation of a book was completely trumped?

I can think of a couple of others. I think that the Jurassic Park movie, for example, is way better than the Michael Crichton upon which it is based. I think Stanley Kubrick’s version of The Shining is far and away more interesting that Stephen King’s original book.

I suspect this comment section will feature much hand wringing! I welcome it! Let’s get started!

Comments

115 responses to “Off Topic: Better Than The Book?”

READ THE COMMENTS

redartifice

April 16, 2013 at 11:20 am

Dunno about trumped, but “High Fidelity” was true to the nature of the book while giving it’s own great spin on the material, and had a great cast.

Children of Men is very different to the book, but was fantastic.

Reply
shane

April 16, 2013 at 11:20 am

Children of Men.
Shawshank Redemption.
Dexter (season 1 only).
Edit: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles

Reply
1. transientmind
  
  April 16, 2013 at 1:18 pm
  
  Hellyeah TMNT. For kicks and giggles (and because I am now an adult with disposable income, busily fulfilling promises to my 8yr old self – “One day you will have money, and you will own this,”) I got ahold of the entire TMNT back catalogue. Not as cool as I remember. Sometimes outright horrifying/depressing (in the way of the best 80s/90s comics).
  
  Reply
Tezz

April 16, 2013 at 11:21 am

I honestly like both but the show is weaker in content, where as the book is jam packed. The battles aren’t shown in the show, just the aftermath, the characters are being culled and things are being streamlined too much for my taste.

Reply
1. sabrescene
  
  April 16, 2013 at 11:26 am
  
  Agreed, I’ve only just started reading the books recently but I’m enjoying them a lot more.
  I’ll admit when the show does go all out like the Battle of Blackwater it’s pretty great (that said the books may be better still I’m only about mid-way through the second so far) but most of the time it seems to cut out the best parts (Tyrion’s first battle with his Clansmen) and just throw in extra sex instead.
  
  Reply
  1. thom
    
    April 16, 2013 at 11:50 am
    
    It because boobs are cheaper than battlements.
    
    Reply
    1. tigerion
      
      April 16, 2013 at 11:55 am
      
      That’s my new motto for the TV series 😀
      
      Reply
    2. mdn
      
      April 16, 2013 at 12:29 pm
      
      You don’t win friends with battlements.
      
      Reply
  2. fruitlewp
    
    April 16, 2013 at 12:18 pm
    
    Interestingly enough the Battle of Blackwater was the first time they really put a great deal of effort and money into a battle rather than skipping it and giving us the aftermath (as with the battle between Tywin’s army and Robb’s distraction army / the capturing of Jaime in the riverlands).
    
    I love both the show and the books anyway, but I prefer the books when it comes to story and events. At the moment the show is fast-forwarding a lot of events and skipping a lot of the battles. I don’t hate the show for it, but the extra details are what makes reading the books so worthwhile. All the same there are things about the show that I love too, such as the acting (the obvious would be Peter Dinklage, but my favourite character is Bronn, and I think he’s being portrayed excellently) 🙂
    
    Reply
sabrescene

April 16, 2013 at 11:21 am

I know the ‘true hardcore fans’ will murder me in my sleep for daring to even dream such a thing but Lord of the Rings…the books are soooooo slow and boring….

Reply
1. Sammi
  
  April 16, 2013 at 11:29 am
  
  While I suppose I’m not a ‘true hardcore fan of Lord of the Rings’, I’d say I am a ‘true hardcore fan of modern fantasy’ and I (and many others) very much agree with you. Tolkien is the father of modern fantasy, not the master. He was really writing a history more than a narrative, which is fine, but less immediately entertaining. (Now I’ll probably get the flames as well :P),
  
  Reply
2. lonewolf
  
  April 16, 2013 at 11:39 am
  
  I know what you mean, having read all the books, but there are elements I found critical in the books which I believe they should have kept for the film.
  Such as ~~Tom Bombadil giving the hobbits their weapons~~ and ~~Sauraman moving into the Shire while the hobbits are busy saving the world~~
  
  Reply
  1. DavidM
    
    April 16, 2013 at 12:28 pm
    
    I can’t help but laugh at the fact you’re using spoilers tags on a book that’s been out for well over 50 years.
    
    Reply
    1. mdn
      
      April 16, 2013 at 12:30 pm
      
      It’s called common courtesy. Some people may not have read it yet. I wish more people were like lonewolf.
      
      Reply
      1. ted
        
        April 16, 2013 at 12:49 pm
        
        I think lonewolf is a pretty cool guy!
      2. richardwhereat
        
        April 17, 2013 at 8:50 am
        
        He covers spoilers and doesn’t afraid of anything.
      3. transientmind
        
        April 16, 2013 at 1:23 pm
        
        Yeah, but there should really be a statute of limitations on some things. Like, y’know… King Kong? Dies. Oh, and Jesus? Dies. …But he gets better. Oh, and in the Sixth Sense? OK, actually, I’m not entirely comfy with spoilering that one still.
      4. braaains
        
        April 16, 2013 at 3:55 pm
        
        ~~Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker’s dad. I shit you not.~~
      5. fureien
        
        April 16, 2013 at 5:17 pm
        
        holy shit theres a spoiler tag feature in the format box!
      6. transientmind
        
        April 16, 2013 at 5:35 pm
        
        I think you can also use the HTML tag ‘s’.
  2. labrys
    
    April 16, 2013 at 1:27 pm
    
    So much this ^^.
    I loved the movies. I preferred the books but that may be sentimentality since LOTR was the first fantasy book I really remember reading. However, I felt those two parts really needed to be in the movie. Especially the last one. That was the best bit of the entire series for me.
    
    Reply
  3. @Matt_Phipps
    
    April 16, 2013 at 8:00 pm
    
    ^^ Deserving of auto-nom for Community Kudos.
    
    Reply
3. Salt
  
  April 16, 2013 at 11:46 am
  
  Agreed! The full version of the Lord of the Rings was much more entertaining than the books. Absolutely.
  
  Reply
4. tottlebud
  
  April 16, 2013 at 12:30 pm
  
  Totally agree! I read the trilogy after seeing the film and had to really force myself to get through them. The films were so much more engaging, and I say that as someone who generally likes original content more than reimaginings 🙂
  
  Reply
5. Nexi
  
  April 16, 2013 at 1:04 pm
  
  Incidentally, I believe that this was inverted with The Hobbit. Take a short, concise and entertaining book and turn it into a long winded expose and 9 hours worth of movie with an unhealthy dose of unnecessarily long battle scenes.
  
  Reply
  1. transientmind
    
    April 16, 2013 at 1:24 pm
    
    Actually, while I enjoyed the Hobbit movie, I was definitely soured on the fight in the goblin kingdom. Seriously, that scene just screamed at me, “YOU ARE WATCHING A HOLLYWOOD MOVIE!”
    
    Reply
    1. tigerion
      
      April 16, 2013 at 2:28 pm
      
      That was the worst scene. Although the ending of it almost made is worth while. Almost
      
      Reply
  2. labrys
    
    April 16, 2013 at 1:29 pm
    
    In fairness Peter Jackson has taken a lot from other Tolkein works to pad it out. It explains a lot more about what is happening in the world. But I do agree in general.
    
    Reply
    1. Nexi
      
      April 16, 2013 at 2:17 pm
      
      I should probably clarify I didn’t think the movie was awful, just kinda ordinary, it just didn’t ring all the epic bells that LotR did.
      
      Reply
lonewolf

April 16, 2013 at 11:23 am

A little off track, but I find it interesting the comic book of Kick Ass was more brutal and realistic than the movie.
While I enjoyed several sections of the movie, I found the comic book more compelling.

Reply
1. jordaanm
  
  April 18, 2013 at 4:05 pm
  
  I found Big Daddy’s alter ego in the book to have a lot more emotional impact, and really drove home the message.
  
  Reply
Sammi

April 16, 2013 at 11:25 am

No, a million times no, but then I don’t much care for the books either. As a long time, avid fantasy reader I find Game of Thrones exceedingly overrated, so perhaps I’m not even the target for this question anyway. I like them, but they fall into the better side of average. As for the show, I actually couldn’t watch the first few episodes through at once, the acting was so painfully bad for the first half of Season 1 (specifically from the non-adult actors, and with the exceptions of Beany and Lena Heady) I gave up for 6 months, when I eventually did come back I was glad I gave it another chance because the acting has gotten much better I’ll readily admit (it’s actually a joy to watch the first 3 episodes then jump to the end of season 2 and compare Masisie Williams growth). Most are still pretty much TV actors in my opinion, but it’s very much watchable now. But perfect performances? Not sure how … into acting you are Mark, but well, we’ll have to disagree on that 😛

Reply
1. thom
  
  April 16, 2013 at 11:52 am
  
  I’m just not sure where your coming from with this. Most of the actors were well seasoned, and I just don’t think the acting got better at some point. And most people I know think the children are remarkably good. Joffrey is really well performed!
  
  Reply
  1. Sammi
    
    April 16, 2013 at 2:09 pm
    
    I’m not sure I really want to go hunting for the specific examples for a kotaku comments section so ummm. Off the top of my head, the entire trip to King’s Landing, and there’s specifically a scene involving Arya and Sansa and Joffrey that is just reaaaallly poorly acted, major things like poor word stressing, and poor body language (Think Bioware games, or when you watch a school play and while the dialogue is correct the kid just doesn’t know what to be doing with their body). While I think Joffrey has improved at playing his role, as I mentioned before. I’m not sure it’s even possible to fully judge his acting ability as he hasn’t displayed any range, which I’m not implying his fault, Joffrey is intentionally written as a one dimensional character you’re supposed to dislike, and to that end he’s done well.
    
    Not to be an ass, but ‘most people think x’ is ultimately fallacious, most people I know think the same thing, but they also haven’t put much time into observing acting at any critical level, and granted I’m not and expert, but I’m not just saying ‘I don’t like this actor so nyeh they’re bad ‘ either. Plenty of people think Adam Sandler movies are the most hilarious movies around, Reality TV is phenomenally popular, and depending on your social circle a majority of people you know could in fact think Jersey Shore is a quality program with a stellar cast.
    https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon
    
    It’s tricky to discuss acting sometimes because it’s impossible not to have subjective opinions influence you, but there is objectively good and bad acting too, and I feel the first 5 or 6 episodes of Season 1 were objectively weakly acted (with some exceptions), and I’m okay with being in the minority in that. I still like the show, I’m still thrilled it exists because it’s walking evidence fantasy TV adaptions can be successful and that could mean more fantasy adaptions, and I’ve actually really enjoyed watching the acting (in my opinion) improve.
    
    Reply
2. Omega Man
  
  April 16, 2013 at 12:19 pm
  
  The reason this show is so popular is due to the high production value and great acting, I was hooked from the start. I am not sure you are watching the same show as the rest of us.
  
  Reply
  1. kaflooey
    
    April 16, 2013 at 12:51 pm
    
    Did you like The Omega Man better than the book I Am Legend? While Charlton Heston was brilliant, that’s probably one of my favourite books about vampire-zombies, and the ending was just so poetic.
    
    Reply
  2. Sammi
    
    April 16, 2013 at 2:12 pm
    
    I’m not sure if you can deductively show that (Look at reality TV for some pretty solid counterexamples), but I’m happy for you to have your opinion, while still assuming we are watching the same show. 🙂
    
    Reply
3. fruitlewp
  
  April 16, 2013 at 12:21 pm
  
  Does the show insist upon itself ?
  
  Reply
weresmurf

April 16, 2013 at 11:26 am

Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile, The Mist.

Frank Darabont ‘gets’ Stephen King. He understands how to film his works in a way noone else does. He also knows how to improve upon his works. The ending to The Mist was so much better than the one in the book, Shawshank was a far better movie than the book and The Green Mile while an excellent book worked *far* better as a movie too.

Reply
1. Salt
  
  April 16, 2013 at 11:44 am
  
  Agreed! Frank Darabont borders on Legendary in my opinion. Although not Stephen King related, there is also a little show we all may have heard of called The Walking Dead.
  
  Reply
2. bazuden
  
  April 16, 2013 at 11:47 am
  
  Speaking of Frank Darabont, I’m interested to see where The Walking Dead TV Series goes.
  
  I’ve been disappointed with the latest story arc in the comics:
  ~~Negan is The Governer 2.0~~, IMHO.
  
  Reply
3. braaains
  
  April 16, 2013 at 11:49 am
  
  I’d disagree on The Shawshank Redemption being BETTER than the book. They’re both great – it’s clearly the best of all the adaptations of King’s stories – but the biggest (actually, probably the ONLY) problem I had with the film compared to the book was that the film just didn’t really give a sense of the passage of time. The guy is in there for something like 20 years, but apart from Tim Robbins’ hair getting a big greyer, you don’t really get any sense of it. It could just be 1 or 2 years. None of the other characters seemed to age at all. Although from what I recall, I think they may have actually shortened his time in prison by a decade or so in the film vs the book, presumably so they could get away with the same actors the whole way through. There’s no way Bob Gunton’s warden character would have been there the full 30 years if he was that age at the start of the movie. In the book there were several wardens that came and went over the years. Without that sense of time passing, I just didn’t think the film really gave a sense of just how much Andy lost.
  
  I loved the ending Darabont put on The Mist, but I also loved King’s open-ended sort of ending. I think each of their endings are perfect for their respective mediums. Darabont’s ending is definitely a better way to end the film, but King’s ending is a better way to end the novella.
  
  I’d agree on The Green Mile working better as a film. Although I read it in its original serialized form which made it feel a bit disjointed. I’m not sure if the book would have worked better for somebody who got to read it all in one go.
  
  Also, Rob Reiner did a good job with Stephen King adaptations – Stand By Me and Misery.
  
  Reply
  1. tigerion
    
    April 16, 2013 at 11:54 am
    
    I find it hard to judge what is better when something is based on a short story. I would say that most films based on short stories are better, but only because they have the time to fully flesh out characters. It seems a bit apples and oranges
    
    Reply
    1. transientmind
      
      April 16, 2013 at 1:27 pm
      
      Newly-released Oblivion really feels a variation on something I probably read in half a dozen different short-stories / Asiimov award entrants, but what made a relatively enjoyable half-hour/hour read got turned into an utterly gorgeous, stunning work of moving art.
      
      Pretty enough to get past the fact that it has Tom Cruise. (Who I usually can’t stand. He’s actually not too bad in this. I think he’s almost watchable in roles where he’s not trying to convince the audience of how ‘cool’ he is.)
      
      Reply
      1. labrys
        
        April 16, 2013 at 1:32 pm
        
        Yeah I have always thought Tom Cruise could actually be a good actor. You see him in one or two things and think he could be really good. I loved it how he took the piss out of himself in Tropic Thunder for instance. But most of the tie he just seems to be a wanker.
      2. braaains
        
        April 16, 2013 at 3:57 pm
        
        He’s a good actor when he’s actually playing a role (e.g. Tropic Thunder or Born On The Fourth Of July). The problem is that most of the time he’s just playing Tom Cruise.
      3. tigerion
        
        April 16, 2013 at 2:31 pm
        
        Interesting, I was interested in it but the combination of 3d eye candy and Tom cruise as a reluctant action hero pushed it down my list
bookiegnu

April 16, 2013 at 11:30 am

I was just thinking last night that the show is starting to be spread a bit too thin given how many plotlines are happening all at once. I’m glad I’ve already read them, as I don’t think I would know who all the characters were anymore otherwise.

On topic, I think the Arnie total recall was better than the short story it was based on (but it was also very different). Same goes for Starship Troopers.

Reply
1. aegis
  
  April 16, 2013 at 11:37 am
  
  Starship Troopers was a travesty! Missed one of the greatest things Heinlein helped popularise in fiction: powered armour. That said I loved the CG ;P
  
  Reply
  1. kermitron
    
    April 16, 2013 at 11:52 am
    
    I love Starship Troopers and I understand it’s basically a parody (ok, not really, but kind of) but I would really love to see a movie or TV series based directly on (or at least a lot closer to) the novel.
    
    Reply
    1. fruitlewp
      
      April 16, 2013 at 12:27 pm
      
      Based on their track record with sequels and spin-offs since then, I think it’s best we stay content with the original in all its top-notch-CGI, Ironside-y glory. I…. Marauders…. Why….
      
      Reply
  2. lonewolf
    
    April 16, 2013 at 11:53 am
    
    They did add power armour in a later film, but I never read the books.
    
    Reply
    1. strand0410
      
      April 16, 2013 at 5:52 pm
      
      The powered armour in that third movie is also a travesty. In the books, they describe it in exhaustive detail and it’s probably closest to the Terran Marine armour in the Starcraft 2 cinematic.
      
      Reply
2. kaflooey
  
  April 16, 2013 at 12:57 pm
  
  I liked Total Recall for what it was, but not as a better story than in the short story. On Philip K Dick, I may be the only person I know of, but I think Blade Runner is poo compared to Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. I really liked the rotoscoped A Scanner Drakly though, as it was very true to the original text.
  
  And are you sure you’ve read Starship Troopers? the movie have very little in common with the book and was pretty B grade (even if on purpose…). If you read it after you saw the movie though, you may have expected something different, and I could see why that might take away from it.
  
  Reply
  1. bookiegnu
    
    April 16, 2013 at 1:08 pm
    
    I agree on Blade Runner. It’s just one of those movies that never clicked with me.
    
    And yes I saw starship troopers before I read the book. Good pickup. It has been a really long time though, I should probably give it another go.
    
    Reply
tigerion

April 16, 2013 at 11:33 am

Shawshank redemtion
The Princess bride
Jaws

and if you are talking TV series you can’t go past M*A*S*H

Reply
1. shane
  
  April 16, 2013 at 11:43 am
  
  Can’t believe I forgot M*A*S*H, which is an adaptation of an adaptation!
  
  Reply
2. chuloopa
  
  April 16, 2013 at 11:43 am
  
  That’s hilarious. Dad and I were talking about how terrible the Jaws book was on the weekend. he re-read it recently and thought it was rubbish – also he is probably the biggest fan of the movie on the face of the earth… lol
  
  Reply
3. bookiegnu
  
  April 16, 2013 at 11:47 am
  
  I disagree about the Princess Bride movie being better than the book, but only because I love them both so much.
  
  Reply
  1. tigerion
    
    April 16, 2013 at 11:50 am
    
    Well if I’m honest I haven’t read the book but I absolutely adore the movie so can’t see the book being better.
    
    Reply
    1. badger
      
      April 16, 2013 at 2:35 pm
      
      I like them equally, and feel like you can enjoy them both separately without one spoiling the other. The Prestige on the other hand is wonderful in both book and movie form, but despite huge differences they still spoil one another. Different type of story, I guess.
      
      Closer to Princess Bride, though, I like the Stardust movie more than its book.
      
      Reply
  2. germinalconsequence
    
    April 16, 2013 at 6:33 pm
    
    You don’t get the fantastic meta-story in the movie. I mean, Fred Savage was great and all, but the book’s meta-story had me going right to the end.
    
    Reply
    1. bookiegnu
      
      April 17, 2013 at 12:09 pm
      
      And the first chapter of Buttercup’s Baby in the more recent additions… What a tease.
      
      Reply
lapetus2000

April 16, 2013 at 11:33 am

I think it depends when you read the books. I started reading them years ago, well before there was talk of a TV show. I fell in love with the books back then, and so the TV show is just gravy for me. Sexy Gravy.
That said, certain things have been changed for TV, as expected, but I’m not sure it’s for the better in every case. For example, Barristan Selmy, the knight booted out of Joffrey’s kingsguard who then saves Daenerys from a shiney thing, wasn’t revealed to be his true self until much later. It would have been far too difficult to hide his identity on a visual medium like TV, so the character was identified immediately.

Reply
1. dogcat
  
  April 16, 2013 at 12:17 pm
  
  Long termer myself. 9 years now. Question. Did you feel A Dance With Dragons was written in a way to fit the TV format? After a reread i couldnt help but notice his style of writing had changed quite a bit during the latest 6 year gap. Dance felt less booky and more scripty, if that makes sense.
  
  Reply
  1. Sylus
    
    April 16, 2013 at 12:27 pm
    
    As someone who doens’t watch the show but is a long time fan of the books, a dance with dragons was abysmal. The writing and character motivations of most of the characters went out the window (other than Jaime). Also, I hate that Martin takes a page out of comics (where dead doesn’t, in any way shape or form, mean dead)
    
    Reply
    1. lapetus2000
      
      April 16, 2013 at 1:59 pm
      
      I was also disappointed that dead isn’t dead. It takes away from the impact a characters death has. The series has always appealed to me because the main characters aren’t immortal and actually face the same risks as lesser characters. In fact, because I half expect something terrible to happen to them, I care about them more.
      
      Reply
  2. lapetus2000
    
    April 16, 2013 at 2:10 pm
    
    Yes. The writing style has changed. Martin even admits that the TV series has influenced him. He changed his plans to suit the series, so I’m unsurprised he wrote things differently. Osha will have a bigger role in coming books because of TV fan’s reactions to her.
    
    Reply
    1. tigerion
      
      April 16, 2013 at 2:34 pm
      
      Book spoilers (Don’t read if you are only watching the TV series)
      ~~I always figured she would have a larger role in the next role of books. She has taken sole guardianship of one of the stark children so I would expect an entire story arc to be spun about her.~~
      
      Reply
2. fruitlewp
  
  April 16, 2013 at 12:48 pm
  
  Yup. Selmy was introduced into the circle very quickly. There’s also no Strong Belwas? 🙁
  
  The same seems to be going for Theon; there’s no “Reek” character, and even then he’s hardly been tortured or flayed to buggery. He simply jumped on a horse and rode away from the seemingly unguarded keep after a few screws to the foot.
  
  They’ve not detailed Bolton’s bastard much at all, despite him playing a major role in the books. I understand you’ve got to change some things, but this is gradually going to have an even greater effect later on in the story; they’ll have to keep making changes to support it.
  
  And for all the changes that I think were done reasonably well, I wasn’t a fan of the change regarding the fall of winterfell. So the iron islanders knock Theon out and then immediately sack and destroy the entire castle before hightailing it to sell Theon to Ramsay Bolton for a pass home? I just don’t think they tackled this part well. I think that since you’re pretty much given only aftermath, in order to be fully satisfied you have to have the knowledge the books give here. Most of it seems assumed.
  
  It pretty much boils down to this: they’ve made changes big and small as far as the first few seasons are concerned. Down the road, they’ll have to make more changes as a result. And more, and more…
  
  For the most part I’m reasonably content with the changes, though a few times I reckon they could have executed it better. Fortunately I’m blessed with the ability to be able to enjoy each medium for its own merits! 😀
  I love the books more when it comes to sequence of events / story progression and other story elements typically, save for a few moments that I think the show did better. I love the films when it comes to bringing the world to life (they really have some amazing setpieces and atmosphere), and the acting. There are things one will do better than the other, and as far as changes are concerned, it’s the butterfly effect.
  
  So… Just enjoy the sexy gravy. 😛
  
  Reply
  1. tigerion
    
    April 16, 2013 at 2:36 pm
    
    I’m behind on watching the TV series because I just buy the full season when I get around to it. I was not aware of the fact in your first sentence.
    Now I am sad
    
    Reply
johnkj

April 16, 2013 at 11:34 am

I think the advantage movies and tv series have is flow. I do enjoy both tv and the books for various reasons.

The book is better because it’s definitely richer in content, but at times it seems it lacks direction or its taking its time getting there.

The tv obviously is better thought through but can be confusing at times because it’s trying to squeeze in too much content into an hour. Love the acting.

Reply
braaains

April 16, 2013 at 11:36 am

I thought Kubrick’s version of the Shining was atrocious. Just awful. The book is was great, but the film… *shudder*.

I’ve only read the first 2 books of A Song Of Ice And Fire, and so far I’d say I like the books and the show about equally, although I guess that may change as I get further through both.

Lord of the Rings I much preferred the films to the books. There was a good story buried in the books, but I have never read anything in my life that was in greater need of a good editor. In the end, the extended versions of the films probably nailed the story the best, I think.

Reply
1. kaflooey
  
  April 16, 2013 at 1:01 pm
  
  I didn’t think the film was awful, especially if you go into it with Kubricky expectations. But I definitely agree the book is far better. I thought the same when I saw his version of A Clockwork Orange, I love the book but dislike that film immensely.
  
  Reply
  1. braaains
    
    April 16, 2013 at 1:08 pm
    
    I suspect it depends on whether you see the film first or read the book. Everybody I know who read the book first hated the film. But people who saw the film before reading the book (or never read the book at all) generally seem to like the movie.
    
    I know that Stephen King himself disliked Kubrick’s version of it. But then King wrote a miniseries adaption of it himself which I never saw but by all reports was pretty terrible. While I love many of his novels and short stories, his screenplays have all been pretty weak, in my opinion.
    
    Reply
jarrys88

April 16, 2013 at 11:46 am

I love the show but I MUCH prefer the books. soo much more back story to all the characters. You don’t know shit all about the mountain in the show for example whilst in the books they explain sooo much about all the fucked up shit he’s out doing.

Reply
kermitron

April 16, 2013 at 11:49 am

I haven’t read Game of Thrones yet but I plan to start. My wife is halfway through the first book at the moment and says it’s pretty much exactly like season 1 of the show, but with little extra bits that help her understand and remember the characters (she’s notoriously bad at remembering characters names in TV and movies).

As for other book to movie/TV transitions, I would have to say that, even though it’s kind of terrible at times, True Blood is generally better than Charlaine Harris’ Sookie Stackhouse books upon which they are based. Harris seems to want to emulate Anne Rice by spending pages and pages of flowery prose about nothing relevant and then suddenly have a bunch of plot development in a very short span, but she sucks at it (and I already have very little patience for the way Anne Rice does this) so what we really end up with is 16 pages reading about Sookie writing her shopping list, working at the bar, picking up her mail and sunbaking, then the climactic battle that the entire book has been building up to is over in half a page.

I also prefer the movie adaptation of Memoirs of a Geisha. In the book Arthur Golden really comes across as an adult version of the creepy teenage weeaboos that love Japan a little bit too much. Everything is idealised in a strange way. The movie cuts out a lot of the fluff and has a lean, satisfying story arc that basically hits all the same points.

Reply
1. dogcat
  
  April 16, 2013 at 12:20 pm
  
  Tell your wife to stick with it. She will need motivation to get through Feast and Dance, then patience with the guaranteed multi year wait for the last 2 books. But it will probably be worth it.
  
  Reply
  1. kermitron
    
    April 16, 2013 at 12:23 pm
    
    She was going to take her time with the books but after the episode that went up last night she was like “nah, I have to find out what happens now” and plans to tear through them.
    
    Reply
gemini

April 16, 2013 at 11:52 am

Say what you want about Martin’s style, but the depth in the novels goes way beyond anything the show can/will deliver.

Reply
thom

April 16, 2013 at 11:55 am

Basically everything by Stephen King is better on celluloid. I think he’s a master story-teller, rather than a great writer.

I know a lot of people are going to crucify me for this, but I preferred Cloud Atlas the film. In many respects, it was more ambitious and better based, though I did think the structure of the book was interesting.

I liked John Carter the film, but the book is way better because you really get into the characters head. It is written so bloody well.

Reply
1. kaflooey
  
  April 16, 2013 at 1:04 pm
  
  I thought the John Carter film was better than it got credit for. The books are well written, and lend themselves to being made into movies as they are for kids, and are thus fairly straightforward.
  
  Reply
  1. thom
    
    April 16, 2013 at 1:42 pm
    
    Yeah – I want to reiterate that I really enjoyed the film too, I just really love the books.
    
    Reply
lonewolf

April 16, 2013 at 12:10 pm

It was going to be mentioned sooner or later, but Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.
Books the best, tv series a close second, limited somewhat by the technology of the time, recent movie the worst, partly for diverging so strongly from the book and also for waiting until after Adams’ death to bring the damn thing out of development hell.
I will say Rickman was the best voice for Marvin, they had a decent crack at Impossibility physics and they captured the beauracracy of the vogons well.

Reply
1. batguy
  
  April 16, 2013 at 12:16 pm
  
  Where do the radio plays fit into that list? They’re pretty good too, and actually the origins of the story. You should track them down if you haven’t heard them! They even did the reverse process (books to radio) for the last couple of books in recent years.
  
  Reply
  1. lonewolf
    
    April 16, 2013 at 12:46 pm
    
    As the original version of the Guide, I feel the radio series stands on its own.
    I think the books are slightly stronger than the series, but partly because both were written by Adams but with time to reflect and polish the strengths.
    Having read the original script and some of the note s he made, I’m almost temped to have that as the definitive version because of some of the details he threw in there.
    
    Reply
  2. kaflooey
    
    April 16, 2013 at 1:06 pm
    
    This comment reminded me of the War of the Worlds musical for some reason…which I must admit I do rather like.
    
    Reply
2. kermitron
  
  April 16, 2013 at 12:22 pm
  
  Parts of the HHGTTG movie were great, but overall it really fell down by being made by people who thought a 4 minute video of dolphins singing “so long and thanks for all the fish” was too hilarious not to open a movie with.
  
  As far as I’m concerned the books are the definitive HHGTTG, with the old BBC series a faithful if somewhat truncated adaptation.
  
  Reply
3. mdn
  
  April 16, 2013 at 12:36 pm
  
  HHGTTG move was ABYSMAL compared to the books. The books had me giggling like a school girl but the movie had me cringing like I’d been throat fucked by a lemon.
  
  Reply
4. tigerion
  
  April 16, 2013 at 2:38 pm
  
  Didn’t really like the movie, still greatly prefer the books
  
  Reply
dogcat

April 16, 2013 at 12:12 pm

Not to be “that guy”, but the TV show doesnt come close. Its a great show, better than most, but it doesnt have the time or desire to flesh out the characters and history of Westeros the way the books do.

Some movies and TV adaptions are better than the source material. This isnt one of them.

Reply
benny

April 16, 2013 at 12:18 pm

Not in the case of Dan Brown films.

Reply
$fractripro Avatar$

fractripro

April 16, 2013 at 12:29 pm

Adaptation and The Living Daylights.

Reply
alexpants

April 16, 2013 at 12:41 pm

Game of Thrones is difficult. Some characters are better in the TV show and others are better in the books. People like Jon Snow are very internal characters and you get a lot of insight into them through their thought process rather than their dialogue, which is probably why I find TV!Jon so utterly boring

Reply
1. sp00kd
  
  April 18, 2013 at 8:53 am
  
  I find Jon to be exceedingly whiny and ‘oh woe is me’ in the TV series, hardly anything like how he is in the books.
  
  Reply
kaflooey

April 16, 2013 at 12:48 pm

I almost universally like the book better. The often given example of the Shawshank Redemption (which I think the movie is probably better than the book) I think worked so well as a film because the book was a very short novella. Same with Fight Club. (I thought the movie of Choke was a steaming pile of shit though).

And I disagree with two of your examples Mark. I like the book Jurassic Park better, although the movie was very good. And while The Shining is a great movie, I just didn’t like the movie ending nearly as much as the one in the book, which was way more of a mind fuck and also involved more ~~axes in people’s backs~~

Reply
kaflooey

April 16, 2013 at 12:57 pm

Does people’s opinion of what’s better have anything to do with if they read it or saw it first?

Reply
flatliner

April 16, 2013 at 1:07 pm

They books are far superior to the show. The show is great, but Martin said that he wanted after leaving hollywood, to make something that would be impossible to flim. He was sick of his scenes being cut.
I think that the cast of characters, scope and scale of the novels are beyond filming feasibly. HBO are giving it a good go, but things (by necessity) are being cut out.
Much as I enjoy tits and arse, I feel that HBO also have a “titilation quota” which needs to be filled per season. The sex and violence in the books are part of the reality and the realism, wheras I feel some of the scenes in the show are just for the quota. This is something that I think HBO has in all their shows.

Reply
Nexi

April 16, 2013 at 1:14 pm

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, The book fell flat for me in comparison to the others of the series but the movie gave the story the energy that particular book never did.

I prefer the Twilight books to the movies however, I forgot to buy toilet paper the other week and I just knew what I had to do and I assure you it was not to wipe my ass with a DVD.

Reply
labrys

April 16, 2013 at 1:24 pm

I will pretty much always say the book will be better then the movie.
I am yet to read a book and then watch a movie and think the movie is better.
I freely admit some of the major examples given here I have never read i.e. Shawshank Redemption.
Sometimes the movie can be as good as the book. Usually, when a good director or writer has made changes that make sense and work on screen. But I have yet to think that a movie was better then the book.
Which brings me to the issue I have with GoT. I have tried to read the books but can’t really get into them. I want to watch the series because of rave reviews it gets. But I always like reading a book before watching the movie / series. So I’m torn on this one. May have to give the books another go soon.

Reply
caironater

April 16, 2013 at 1:38 pm

The movie for Eragon was AWEFUL! At least, it was for everyone I know who read the book first, it might be better if you watched it before you read the book though.

Reply
aegis

April 16, 2013 at 3:29 pm

I have to say: I love both the GoT books and series – but the books moreso – though they do get me down a bit when Martin hits powerband during a feast or somesuch boring moment. I really don’t want 20 pages of aurochs fetters dipped in soured cream with garlic capons and ARRHHHH GET ON WITH THE MACHINATIONS AND KILLING!

Reply
Fustercluck

April 16, 2013 at 4:51 pm

I thought that The Hunger Games movie was better than the book…

Reply
1. perforatedear
  
  April 16, 2013 at 5:06 pm
  
  As a stand alone, maybe.
  As a movie that will be getting sequels, I don’t think it set the back story up well enough.
  
  Reply
germinalconsequence

April 16, 2013 at 6:43 pm

I’m a huge fan of Neil Gaiman, but the movie version of Stardust was so much better than the book. It felt more complete, and it had Robert DeNiro. Also, while not better per se, the Scott Pilgrim vs. The World movie was a fantastic adaptation of the source material.

Reply
1. crowbar
  
  April 17, 2013 at 12:58 pm
  
  Agreed. Stardust was an excellent adaptation.
  
  This may be polarising, but I also thought “Watchmen” was a pretty decent effort. The movie ending was actually better imo.
  
  Reply
2. jordaanm
  
  April 18, 2013 at 4:07 pm
  
  The film version of Scott Pilgrim was better purely for the ending. They cut all of the weirdo teen angst running away clump out of the ending.
  
  Reply
brancha

April 16, 2013 at 8:06 pm

How come nobody has mentioned Queen of the Damned? :p

Reply
1. crowbar
  
  April 17, 2013 at 12:50 pm
  
  Because it’s a terrible movie?
  
  Reply
mendoza

April 16, 2013 at 9:24 pm

I’m the best.

Reply
sirsam

April 16, 2013 at 10:54 pm

In my mind the first season was on par with the books but that is because it was all basically across a few plot lines, however as the stories branched out a little more in season 2 (which had some great episodes but also some ordinary ones) it felt all a bit too thin, with certain people being cut or glossed over. I honestly can’t think of a way for the TV show going forward to include all the book detail because it just gets insane as it reaches Dance with Dragons/Feast for Crows level of plot lines.

Reply
geoffc

April 17, 2013 at 1:57 pm

Sorry if this has already been covered – Did you stream it, or was it a download

GC

Reply
jimu

April 17, 2013 at 6:47 pm

Fight Club, that is all.

Reply
jordaanm

April 18, 2013 at 4:10 pm

Fight Club, Scott Pilgrim, The Mask.

Reply

Escape From Tarkov Players Really Hate Its New Special Edition [Update: Battlestate Backs Down]

Stellar Blade ‘Censored’ Outfits: What Actually Changed?

Here’s Why Knuckles Was Always The Better Character To Play In Sonic

Dreamhack Melbourne 2024 Felt More Like PAX Aus Than An Esports Event

Google Play Account Invents Fake Sonic History, Might Be AI BS

The Best Gaming Deals In Australia Today

EB Games’ Save On Sale: Our Top Picks [Update]

Internet For Gaming: The Best NBN Plans To Help Fix Your Ping

Where To Buy A Steam Deck In Australia And New Zealand

Big W’s Nintendo Switch Offer Is One Of The Cheapest In Australia Right Now

Off Topic: Better Than The Book?

Comments

115 responses to “Off Topic: Better Than The Book?”

Leave a Reply Cancel reply