When a Book Becomes a MOVIE

The first thing that popped in to my head was The Notebook. Fantastic movie, but I didn't think so much of the book.

i hate true blood the show compared to the sookie stackhouse books.

Yeah, almost every Stephen King film made. His books just don't translate well, with some exceptions, or they attract second-rate filmmakers.

Lord of Illusions, from Clive Barker's Cabal, doesn't work for me, and I doubt most of his books could ever translate.

If Akira, Ghost in the Shell, and Evangelion ever get made into live action films, they will be trainwrecks.

I have a feeling Warren Ellis's Authority is going to lose a lot on the big screen, if it ever makes it there. I'd think the same of the NeverEnding Story if Wolfgang Peterson hadn't already made a great film of it.

i loved Intensity (Dean Koontz) even though it was a made for TV movie (i think)

I tried reading The Vampire Diaries but they did nothing for me. However, the tv show is my favourite show of all time. I also love the Lord of the Rings movies way more than the books. I do love the Harry Potter films but nowhere near as much as the books.

Vampire Diaries is a prime example where every change they made from the books to the (small) screen improved the story immensely, IMO.

Dean Koontz, except for Intensity, is where filmmakers go to really frak it up. I mean, done well, Phantoms and Sole Survivor could have really been great entertainment. They were two of his better books. But as films, they are a fairly huge disappointment.

I liked Percy Jackson.

It's not officially a movie yet, but The Hunger Games should never be on film.

childeroland said:

If Akira, Ghost in the Shell, and Evangelion ever get made into live action films, they will be trainwrecks.

Click to expand...

I shudder at this thought.

Dune should never have been made into a movie - twice!

I thought the 5th HP movie was better than the book, only because they cut out Harry being a emo prat at the end.

CheyElizabeth said:

It's not officially a movie yet, but The Hunger Games should never be on film.

Click to expand...

2011 release date.

I think that Stephen King's monster movies are always really bad. It, Maximum Overdrive, Sometimes They Come Back, However, his other stuff is generally great, even on film. Carrie, Children of the Corn, Stand By Me, Shawshank Redemption, Misery, The Shining - those are all fantastic films. Even Secret Window wasn't horrible.
Most people challenge me when I mention that Shawshank was actually based on a Stephen King novella - that's one that's definitely not known by your average person. And Stand By Me. I think that's more widely known to be a SK novella than Shawshank, but not by much.

If I really like a book, I don't watch the movie. Ever.

The characters are in my head. I know what they look like and who they are, so I don't want some cack-handed film maker messing that up.

darkprincealain said:

Dean Koontz, except for Intensity, is where filmmakers go to really frak it up. I mean, done well, Phantoms and Sole Survivor could have really been great entertainment. They were two of his better books. But as films, they are a fairly huge disappointment.

Click to expand...

I agree. I love his early books, but they really have messed up the movies. Watchers is my all-time favorite Koontz novel, and the movie is so off the mark it isn't funny.

Grrarrgh said:

I think that Stephen King's monster movies are always really bad. It, Maximum Overdrive, Sometimes They Come Back, However, his other stuff is generally great, even on film. Carrie, Children of the Corn, Stand By Me, Shawshank Redemption, Misery, The Shining - those are all fantastic films. Even Secret Window wasn't horrible.
Most people challenge me when I mention that Shawshank was actually based on a Stephen King novella - that's one that's definitely not known by your average person. And Stand By Me. I think that's more widely known to be a SK novella than Shawshank, but not by much.

Click to expand...

I agree with Shawshank, Stand By Me, and The Shining being excellent movies. (I knew the first two were SK before the movies came out). I also really enjoyed the Green Mile. Some of his other books turned movies didn't work as well.

Satori1977 said:

I agree with Shawshank, Stand By Me, and The Shining being excellent movies. (I knew the first two were SK before the movies came out). I also really enjoyed the Green Mile. Some of his other books turned movies didn't work as well.

Click to expand...

Green Mile!!! I knew I was missing a big one in there, I was just completely drawing a blank.

COchick said:

The first thing that popped in to my head was The Notebook. Fantastic movie, but I didn't think so much of the book.

Click to expand...

I agree with this, I am a big fan of Nicholas Sparks, but the Notebook and A walk to remember were better as films. Dear John though I thought was better as a book.

I loved Maximum Overdrive simply because it was so bad. I find that I generally prefer the book to the movie.

The one that pops into my head is 'Blood and Chocolate'. A werewolf book that was made into a movie in the last few years. The only thing it had in common with the book was the names of the characters. Other than that, everything was wrong. And they have the gall to say it's based off the book.
The one irritation I really had was when the werewolves all showed up in the forest to change. They show up all dressed up with fancy cars. Must that always happen? Whatever happened to cheap T-shirts?

CheyElizabeth said:

I liked Percy Jackson.

Click to expand...

for me, the books were okay, the movie was garbage. IMO

I don't think Micheal Crichton's books translate well to film, with the exception of Jurassic Park, and even then it cut out the best bits.

Sphere was just...no. Now that was bad. Not as bad as The Lost World, but just bad.

Schu said:

I don't think Micheal Crichton's books translate well to film, with the exception of Jurassic Park, and even then it cut out the best bits.
.

Click to expand...

You got that right. I like Jurassic Park, but after reading the book, it seemed so empty.

I agree with who said Order of the Phoenix played better as a movie than a book. There were a couple things I missed in the movie that were in the book, but overall... it translated very well.

The book Battle Royale is an amazing psychological action/thriller. The Japanese adaptation took out all the character development and psychology and turned it into a shoot-em-up. And strangely, the movie is praised as one of Japan's best. However, those who say that have, as you can guess, never read the book. It's the equivalent of turning Silence of the Lambs into Friday the 13th.

childeroland said:

Yeah, almost every Stephen King film made. His books just don't translate well, with some exceptions, or they attract second-rate filmmakers.

Click to expand...

I think the latter is probably the case, because when they attract good people (ie. Frank Darabont) they make damn bang-up movies.

One movie that they're making from a book, that I will go to my grave never seeing: On The Road.

What. The. Hell.

You can't take that book out of Kerouac's head and put it on screen.

And I'm not even anti-books-into-movies. But that is one that should be untouched by cinema.

Same with Catcher In The Rye, which I'm sure now that Salinger is dead, somebody is already trying to get made.

They are going to try and tackle King's Dark Tower series with a possible TV adaptation and then a movie to finish off the series. (I'm excited because I love the book)

However, I tend to get lazy if a book has been made into a movie and I haven't read the book yet. I'll watch the movie, and promise myself I'll read the book if I liked the movie, but rarely follow up. (bad reader I is, bad!)

If I did read the book first, and then see the movie, I don't have too many expectations since they usually have to rewrite the script a gazillion times and change certain things to fit a novel into a 90 minute movie. I'd rather the book be better then the movie anyway, even if the movie is enjoyable.

I was so happy when they decided to start making movies from the Narnia books. I was sad to see they didn't take off like the Harry Potter movies, but at least they're still attempting to keep the movies going. Voyage Of The Dawn Treader opens seen. (sweet) I loved, loved, loved those books growing up.

Okay. So a few years back, I LOVED Eragon. The movie was terrible and I was irritated and disappointed. Seriously, like one of the worst. movies. ever. Ehh, but I don't really care as I don't like the Inheritance Cycle anymore. :/


Lord of The Rings was brilliant. Mind blowing. Beautiful. Period.
(Although do note that a few things were changed ever so slightly, which was annoying.
And they cut out Tom!! *sigh* I love that part..)

Chronicals of Narnia was pretty awesome. The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe was really really good and stuck to the book which I liked- but Prince Caspian was not like the book.. annoying! I hope the Voyage of The Dawn Treader is better..

Pride & Prejudice- both versions (the old one and the new one..like with keira knightly) are amazing. LOVE LOVE LOVE.

Emma- I haven't seen the old one, but BBC released a newer version last year and it was adorable. four hours of pure bliss. jane austen= amazing.

I can recall being very excited when hearing the Outsiders was being made into a movie. Although everyone I knew loved the movie, I wasn't a fan of it--even though my tween heart told me to enjoy all the new hunky and upcoming actors starring in the movie. Even that didn't help LOL. I never watched the movie again.

Mind you I'm in the minority because everyone else I knew loved it.