Author Topic: Book Versus Film?  (Read 889 times)  

Offline EDDIEO

  • Status: Dr. Seuss
  • *
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Book Versus Film?
« on: August 02, 2017, 01:52:47 AM »

It's the eternal debate.

Pretty much as one sided a competition as Batman versus Superman. How could Batman ever beat Superman? No chance.

In the novel "Papillon", a French convict in the 1920's tries desperately to escape from the penal colony on Devil's Island.

The story is truly epic, if untrue. It was discredited a few years ago.

In the film Steve McQueen played the lead and Dustin Binman was his friend for many years in captivity.

Filming took place in Jamaica, and while the method actor, Binman, starved himself and stayed out of the sun for his role, McQueen sunbathed on the beach and smoked dope, putting on a couple of stone.

The director had to be creative and film McQueen from acute angles, and the make up department earned their money.

Ironically, McQueen earned the only acting award for the film, a Golden Globe for best actor. Chew on that Binman. PS: You didn't look like a woman when you played Tootsie. You looked like Kathy Bates on a very bad hair day.

I watched the film at the weekend and though it comes a poor second to the book, it might spur on a few people to pick up the book.

So, please remember that film versions can actually assist book sales.

What classic films do you think are actually better than the books?

PM me if you want to review either book
Eddie Owens

Offline alawston

  • Status: Arthur C Clarke
  • *****
  • Posts: 2699
  • Gender: Male
  • London
  • London-based writer and actor
    • View Profile
    • Andrew K Lawston's intermittent blogular adventures
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #1 on: August 02, 2017, 02:04:09 AM »
Phantom of the Opera (whichever version, it's a dreadful book)
Le Mepris
Pierrot le Fou
The later Harry Potter films (ie, the third one onwards. The first two are rubbish)
Watership Down


Broadly comic writer working across as many genres as he can. Acting done.
Andrew Lawston | Facebook | Twitter

Online Doglover

  • Status: Dostoevsky
  • ******
  • Posts: 3961
  • Gender: Female
  • Huntingdon, United Kingdom
  • If you want real love, buy a dog.
    • View Profile
    • Margaret Brazear Author
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #2 on: August 02, 2017, 02:04:21 AM »
Better than the books? That would be rare. But, I have to say that A Tale of Two Cities, with Dirk Bogarde, was much easier to understand for me. Of course I was only ten when I saw the film and came home and read the book, so that could explain it.

Usually in a film, bits of the book are cut out to make it fit the length. Gone with the Wind of course had loads cut out of the story, and even the film seemed to jump from one scene to another without much continuity, just to squeeze it into four hours. I don't mind that, but I object to the film producers actually changing the story from the book, like they did with the Laurence Olivier version of Pride and Prejudice. Completely ruined it.


The past is another country; they do things differently there
Margaret Brazear | Website | Blog | Facebook | Readers Group | Comic Covers

Offline C. Gold

  • Status: Arthur Conan Doyle
  • ****
  • Posts: 867
    • View Profile
    • Golden Elm Publishing
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #3 on: August 02, 2017, 02:18:44 AM »
I much prefer the movie versions of Lord of the Rings trilogy and the Hobbit to the actual books. Shoot me, I know! I love Tolkien's ideas but his implementation isn't always clear or my viewing of what he described was just lacking in imagination. That entire horse charge down the hillside with the sun rising was pretty lame in my own mind but epic in the theater.

Online Doglover

  • Status: Dostoevsky
  • ******
  • Posts: 3961
  • Gender: Female
  • Huntingdon, United Kingdom
  • If you want real love, buy a dog.
    • View Profile
    • Margaret Brazear Author
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #4 on: August 02, 2017, 02:22:52 AM »
Actually, on considering this question, I realise that there are more. Rebecca, for instance, was a great film; I thought the book was so tedious and boring I can't imagine how it ever got published. I have similar feelings for H.G. Wells' stories, the Time Machine was much better in film, both versions. Dracula has been made into film several times, some really brilliant and others really pathetic, but the book I just couldn't get into.


The past is another country; they do things differently there
Margaret Brazear | Website | Blog | Facebook | Readers Group | Comic Covers

Offline alawston

  • Status: Arthur C Clarke
  • *****
  • Posts: 2699
  • Gender: Male
  • London
  • London-based writer and actor
    • View Profile
    • Andrew K Lawston's intermittent blogular adventures
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #5 on: August 02, 2017, 02:27:35 AM »
I much prefer the movie versions of Lord of the Rings trilogy and the Hobbit to the actual books. Shoot me, I know! I love Tolkien's ideas but his implementation isn't always clear or my viewing of what he described was just lacking in imagination. That entire horse charge down the hillside with the sun rising was pretty lame in my own mind but epic in the theater.

They're marvellous films (Lord of the Rings more so than the Hobbit for me). I love Tolkien's prose, and I know a lot of people have views on the following opinion, but cutting Farmer Maggot, Tom Wretched Bombadil, and most of the Elvish songs was an inspired move by Peter Jackson. Those first few hundred pages before the hobbits leave the Shire are painful.


Broadly comic writer working across as many genres as he can. Acting done.
Andrew Lawston | Facebook | Twitter

Online Spin52

  • Status: Jane Austen
  • ***
  • Posts: 363
  • Gender: Female
  • Seattle and Oxfordshire
    • View Profile
    • Amazon author page
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #6 on: August 02, 2017, 02:29:19 AM »
I much prefer the movie versions of Lord of the Rings trilogy and the Hobbit to the actual books. Shoot me, I know! I love Tolkien's ideas but his implementation isn't always clear or my viewing of what he described was just lacking in imagination. That entire horse charge down the hillside with the sun rising was pretty lame in my own mind but epic in the theater.
I agree. I couldn't slog through even one of the books, but enjoyed the films.


Tradtional mysteries with a dash of humor -- no cats, no cupcakes
Facebook | Amazon author page

Offline EDDIEO

  • Status: Dr. Seuss
  • *
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #7 on: August 02, 2017, 02:49:55 AM »
Agreed on LOTR. Tolkien describes the colours of the flowers in the fields and it's torture to read.

I would just mention that some of the biggest blockbuster films of their day were based on books and the books were definitely better than the films.

That was mainly because the books had so much more in them, that the director could never fit into the time length for a film. Think about "The Godfather", three hours long, and yet three hundred pages of the book are never shown. Or "From Here to Eternity" which has another three or four hundred pages never shown on film.

PM me if you want to review either book
Eddie Owens

Offline Lee Carlon

  • Status: Lewis Carroll
  • **
  • Posts: 108
  • Brisbane, Australia
    • View Profile
    • www.leecarlon.com
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #8 on: August 02, 2017, 02:52:06 AM »
Pretty much as one sided a competition as Batman versus Superman. How could Batman ever beat Superman? No chance.

Well, as long as their moms don't change their names it'll be an eternal stalemate...

Lee Carlon

Offline Lee Carlon

  • Status: Lewis Carroll
  • **
  • Posts: 108
  • Brisbane, Australia
    • View Profile
    • www.leecarlon.com
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #9 on: August 02, 2017, 02:53:45 AM »
Fight Club. The movie is way better and actually has an ending.

Lee Carlon

Offline BellaJames

  • Status: Arthur Conan Doyle
  • ****
  • Posts: 689
    • View Profile
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #10 on: August 02, 2017, 04:07:51 AM »
Movies better than the book:

1. The notebook
2. The devil wears prada
3. A walk to remember
4. Chocolat
5. Love Rosie
6. Sex and the city
7. Brokeback mountain
8. PS I love you
9. If only it were true (movie is called 'Just like heaven')
10. The time traveler's wife
11. confessions of a shopaholic

« Last Edit: August 02, 2017, 04:13:08 AM by BellaJames »

Offline Douglas Milewski

  • Status: Scheherazade
  • *****
  • Posts: 1052
    • View Profile
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #11 on: August 02, 2017, 04:20:41 AM »
Wicked. It hasn't even been filmed yet, but it'll be better than the book because the stage play is better than the book.

Planet of the Apes is arguably better than the book, but the two stories have so little in common as to be incomparable. Both work well in their own ways.

Disclaimer: I sell horribly. Set your filters accordingly.

Online LadyG

  • Status: Arthur Conan Doyle
  • ****
  • Posts: 646
  • Gender: Female
  • Michigan
    • View Profile
    • A Goode One
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #12 on: August 02, 2017, 04:42:23 AM »
The Princess Bride has been one of my favorite movies for years, and I was so excited to finally read the book. Ugh, what a disappointment! The movie is so charming and sweet and funny, and the book ... well, the book is not.

Movies better than the book:

1. The notebook
2. The devil wears prada
3. A walk to remember
4. Chocolat
5. Love Rosie
6. Sex and the city
7. Brokeback mountain
8. PS I love you
9. If only it were true (movie is called 'Just like heaven')
10. The time traveler's wife
11. confessions of a shopaholic

Oh, I'll argue with you about Time Traveler's Wife! I thought the book was an absolute masterpiece, but hated the movie! Ah, well, I guess we're all entitled to our opinions.  ;)


Armed with nothing but coffee and a sense of humor.
A.J. Goode | A Goode One | Twitter | Facebook | Newsletter sign-up

Offline alawston

  • Status: Arthur C Clarke
  • *****
  • Posts: 2699
  • Gender: Male
  • London
  • London-based writer and actor
    • View Profile
    • Andrew K Lawston's intermittent blogular adventures
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #13 on: August 02, 2017, 04:45:19 AM »
Movies better than the book:

1. The notebook
2. The devil wears prada
3. A walk to remember
4. Chocolat
5. Love Rosie
6. Sex and the city
7. Brokeback mountain
8. PS I love you
9. If only it were true (movie is called 'Just like heaven')
10. The time traveler's wife
11. confessions of a shopaholic


I have to disagree on Chocolat, if only because I was in a charity anthology with Joanne Harris and she's wonderful, and has been enormously encouraging to my wife (who desperately wants to write but has a confidence issue before she can even pick a pen) on Twitter.

On the other hand, much as I can't stand SATC, I did once flick through the book when a colleague left it kicking around the workplace and that was awful.


Broadly comic writer working across as many genres as he can. Acting done.
Andrew Lawston | Facebook | Twitter

Online Doglover

  • Status: Dostoevsky
  • ******
  • Posts: 3961
  • Gender: Female
  • Huntingdon, United Kingdom
  • If you want real love, buy a dog.
    • View Profile
    • Margaret Brazear Author
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #14 on: August 02, 2017, 05:16:37 AM »
I was forced to watch Chocolat when my niece was staying and I thought it was a load of codswallop! :-X


The past is another country; they do things differently there
Margaret Brazear | Website | Blog | Facebook | Readers Group | Comic Covers

Offline David Peterson

  • Status: Lewis Carroll
  • **
  • Posts: 106
  • Gender: Male
  • Texas
    • View Profile
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #15 on: August 02, 2017, 05:38:33 AM »
I went through a phase a while ago where I read the books for classic movies I've loved (Psycho, Exorcist, Rosemary's Baby, and others). The only one that was disappointing was Jaws. There were some subplots in the book that added nothing to the story. The movie cut it down to a cleaner story with much more sympathetic characters.

Member since 02/08/2014 | webiste | (make your own reading bar)

Offline Ann in Arlington

  • Global Moderator
  • Status: Shakespeare
  • *****
  • Posts: 64156
  • Gender: Female
  • Arlington, VA
  • Let's go NATS
    • View Profile
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #16 on: August 02, 2017, 05:53:49 AM »
Hey folks!

Moving this to the Book Corner as I'm sure it is a discussion of interest to everyone.


My Kindles
Nautilus (Voyage)
Oasis
Hermoine (Fire HD8)
Hogwarts (KDX)
Ed's (Basic)
S7Edge (KApp for Android)
Galaxy (KApp for Android)
(Make your own reading bar) | Ann Von Hagel | Arlington, VA | kboards  MODERATOR

Offline EDDIEO

  • Status: Dr. Seuss
  • *
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #17 on: August 02, 2017, 06:07:21 AM »
Dustin Hoffman.

It's a very British joke on his surname.

PM me if you want to review either book
Eddie Owens

Offline BellaJames

  • Status: Arthur Conan Doyle
  • ****
  • Posts: 689
    • View Profile
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #18 on: August 02, 2017, 06:39:07 AM »
The Princess Bride has been one of my favorite movies for years, and I was so excited to finally read the book. Ugh, what a disappointment! The movie is so charming and sweet and funny, and the book ... well, the book is not.

Oh, I'll argue with you about Time Traveler's Wife! I thought the book was an absolute masterpiece, but hated the movie! Ah, well, I guess we're all entitled to our opinions.  ;)

My gosh, I struggled through 'The time traveler's wife' book. It took me weeks to read it. Each to their own. I thought the movie was slightly better than the book, although the movie was not that good.


Offline V.P.

  • Status: Arthur Conan Doyle
  • ****
  • Posts: 589
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #19 on: August 02, 2017, 09:15:59 AM »
The Shawshank Redemption. The book was good, but the movie was far, far better (IMHO).


Offline Nic

  • Status: Arthur C Clarke
  • *****
  • Posts: 2682
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #20 on: August 02, 2017, 09:48:41 AM »
The 13th Warrior, much better than Eaters of the Dead.

Offline FrancisLeggett

  • Status: Dr. Seuss
  • *
  • Posts: 5
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #21 on: August 02, 2017, 04:00:07 PM »
I have to say I preferred Field of Dreams to Shoeless Joe by W.P. Kinsella, though that could be because I watched the movie a lot growing up and only got round to reading the book last year, so the movie brings with it a lot of fond memories for me.


Francis Leggett

Offline deckard

  • Status: Jane Austen
  • ***
  • Posts: 312
    • View Profile
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #22 on: August 02, 2017, 05:14:19 PM »
Jaws.

"We're gonna need a bigger boat!"


Offline Elsye_Harwood

  • Status: Dr. Seuss
  • *
  • Posts: 33
  • Gender: Female
    • View Profile
    • Elsye Harwood
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #23 on: August 11, 2017, 06:03:31 PM »
Have to agree with you, V.P on the Shawshank Redemption. That was  a short story which became an epic film and a  modern classic.
Oh and yes I agree with you as well, Doglover. I also  love the Dirk Bogarde  film version of A Tale of Two cities. Makes me cry every time.
 
And  controversially I'd  say most adaptations of Gulliver's Travels.
We had to read it at University after we'd spent  three weeks studying Moby Dick. Everyone in the group was so disappointed it wasn't full of lots of little people but instead was mostly made up of  serious political  satire we  didn't find anywhere near as entertaining.  :o :'(

This question is definitely one to ponder and come back to as I'm sure there are more...

 
Historical fantasy mainly but knowing me it'll be all the ones I read as a child. Enid Blyton Scifi?
Elsye Harwood | My Blog | Facebook | Twitter

Offline C. J. Sears

  • Status: Lewis Carroll
  • **
  • Posts: 240
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • ImpromptuGameof52
Re: Book Versus Film?
« Reply #24 on: August 16, 2017, 03:30:07 PM »
I prefer the book versions of Harry Potter 1-5 and the film adaptations of Half Blood Prince & Deathly Hallows.
I favor both of the first two Jurassic Park films over their book counterparts (although they're great too).
I enjoy the less meandering pacing of the Game of Thrones television show over the books.