Books that have been adapted for the big screen

Last two books I have read were Shutter Island by Dennis Lehane, and The Road by Cormac McCarthy.

Shutter Island was a brilliant read, couldn't put it down, in my opinion the film did it justice, thoroughly enjoyed the film.  I thought Leonardo Dicaprio was fantastic, and I loved the little twist at the ending that strayed from the book.

The Road is one of the best books that I have ever read, a definate favourite. I haven't yet seen the film, because I'm a bit unsure of how the book would have translated over to the big screen.  The style in which it is written is rather confusing at first but after sticking with it it totally pays off.

Any thoughts, or additions??

Twilight/New Moon! (The books are really good! [(:|])

Erm Northern Lights by Philip Pullman was adapted to become 'The Golden Compass' which was **** in my opinion. They missed so much out of the film and switched the order that it happened in. The book is brilliant though. I'm not normally interested in that fantasy kind of book but it was really good

Trainspotting - irvine welsh
 One of my favourite films and books, its a little confusing to read at first as its written in Scottish dialect however you get used to it.

No Country for old men - Cormac Mccarthy
Amazing book and film

 The Lovely Bones - Alice Sebold
 I've not yet seen the film however the book is really good

 Yes Man - Danny Wallace
  Its not a novel however its still a fantastic read, as you forget from time to time that it is a true story

  I'm currently reading Requiem for a dream, in case you didnt notice i like reading books that have been adapted to films  Its always cool to read a book and have your interpretation of how the characters and places should act and look, and then see how someone else has imagined the same scenario and adapted it to film.

Sharp Dressed Man

Trainspotting - irvine welsh
One of my favourite films and books, its a little confusing to read at first as its written in Scottish dialect however you get used to it.

No Country for old men - Cormac Mccarthy
Amazing book and film

[sm=thumb.gif]

Sharp Dressed Man


The Lovely Bones - Alice Sebold
I've not yet seen the film however the book is really good

FIlm isnt great, tbh.  I found it to be a bit drawn out

Upcoming -
Frank Turner and the Sleeping Souls
Meatloaf
Eric Clapton
Rory Gallagher Tribute Festival
Download Festival 2013
Bruce Springsteen
Electric Picnic
Roger Waters
Black Sabbath

 

debbieharrs

Erm Northern Lights by Philip Pullman was adapted to become 'The Golden Compass' which was **** in my opinion. They missed so much out of the film and switched the order that it happened in. The book is brilliant though. I'm not normally interested in that fantasy kind of book but it was really good

I could have cried they fucked that book up so much. The film LOOKED amazing though, just a shame it was such a mess.

I read The Road and have no plan to even think about it ever again, never find force myself through watching it [:/]

 

Sequoia Throne 

It's all fun and games, until someone posts a picture of Nash. 

 

Obvious Harry Potter answer here lol... in my honest and biased opinion they should have not left anything out/changed anything when adapting them in to films. With the popularity of the series i could see tonnes of people (children too) sitting through the whole films even if they were 3-4 hours long (i know for sure i would). Too much was changed really and so many important things were left out and had a crap replacemrnt for it.

Also the Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief, two of the main charcters were severly wrong and pretty much the whole plot in the film was wrong. If it wasn't for the characters being called their actual names you wouldn't be able to tell it was adapted from the book.

 

I find it so annoying when films are NEVER the same as the book. I'm going to see the film because I liked the book! The main reason for that is because I like the plot and the characters, don't fuck about with them >:-]

 

Sequoia Throne 

It's all fun and games, until someone posts a picture of Nash. 

 

Interview with the Vampire and Queen of the Damned by Anne Rice

Books are brilliant and I always seem to go back over the series every couple of years.

Interview with the vampire film wasn't too bad although Tom Cruise should never had played Lestat.  Brad pitt was good as Louis and Kirsten Dunst played Claudia really well, even if she was a bit old!

Queen of the Damned was just abysmal!!! Stuart Townsend was too wet, Aaliyah was too dark for Akasha and it was just too far away from the book to even be credible.

 
  
WHAT GOES ON TOUR, STAYS ON TOUR  

Da Vinci Code and Angels & Demons.

2 of my fave books, and the films did not do them justice at all, far too many alterations when adapted to the big screen, characters and side storys went missing, and I did not enjoy them at all in comparison with the books. However people I know who have not read the books really enjoyed the films, and when I thought about it and watched them again I could see why, if theyre jugded purely as the film, theyre not too bad, but when I initially watched them, I couldnt help but compare with the books.

Makes me wonder how The Lost Symbol movie adaptation will turn out, as it is already in the works. Im not holding my breath.

 

 

Call me daft, but I prefer to watch the movie first. This is normally because no matter how good a movie is, the book it's base don is usually better. So if I watch the movie first and I like it, then I can read the book and enjoy it too. The other way round, I tend to find that I enjoy a book, and I'm then let down by the movie.

However, one of my favourite,= books is Jurassic Park, and the movie adaptation of that was awesome!

One film i never knew was a book was Die Hard! Based on a 1979 book "Nothing lasts forever" and Die Hard is one of the best films ever made!

I've read the first Bourne book and absolutely adore the films

Probably the worst adaptation i've ever seen is Troy. read and studied The Iliad which i love and really hate the film

I am a die hard harry potter fan.. and the one thing i cannot stand is the filmd.. they are shocking!!

I cannot stand Daniel Radcliffs acting.. :@ it also annoys me that they miss out crucial parts :(

Rxx

RIP mr. paul gray xxxx

I honestly don't think that I've ever seen a film that has been as good as the book, although some have come fairly close. I Am Legend was not one of these. The book >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the film.

Brainwrongs

I honestly don't think that I've ever seen a film that has been as good as the book, although some have come fairly close. I Am Legend was not one of these. The book >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the film.

In my opinion the film of Shutter Island is better than the book. It's the only example I can think of. The book itself is excellent but Scorcese took it and made it even better. The dream sequences aren't really depicted that vividly in the book and those are some of the most effective parts of the film, as well as the bits that take place in Dachau which barely feature in the book at all, not to mention the score which is amongst the most effective at building and sustaining tension I've ever seen. The ambiguous ending in the film was also more effective in my mind than the definitive one in the book.

I've never actually read Shutter Island.[(:|]It's on my 'must read' list, though.

I think The Exorcist is both one of the finest books and films of all time. I loved 'Ringu' as a film but reading the book made the film pale in comparison.

sabbathbloodysabbath

I think The Exorcist is both one of the finest books and films of all time.

Oh, I forgot about this. Both the book and movie are superb.

A rough rule of thumb is that one page of a film screenplay equates to a minute of screen time. With this in mind, it's hardly surprising that books such as Harry Potter have to have large chunks missed out. The films would run for ten hours or more!

I've read "About A Boy" and "High Fidelity" by Nick Hornby. I liked both books and films... I saw the films before reading the books.

I read The Road and then watched the film earlier this year - I thought the film was fairly good actually, although it does contain flashbacks that give more of a glimpse of what happened to the world than the book does. Whether that is a good or a bad thing I couldn't quite decide!
 
The best adaptation from book to film I think I've seen is The Kite Runner. The film is pretty much faithful to the book and just as heart-breaking. Worst adaptation = Captain Corelli's Mandolin. Why Nicholas Cage was cast in the lead role is beyond me, and worst of all (without giving too much away for anyone who hasn't read the book!) all the sadness of the book is removed and a happy, Hollywood ending stuck in its place, which removes the whole heart and soul of the book. 

Download 03, 05, 06, 07, 09, 10, 11, 12
Leeds 06
Rock am Ring 08
Sonisphere 09, 10
Bilbao BBK 10
Glastonbury 98

One of my favourite books (american psycho) was turned into a movie and ruined as has most of easton ellis's movie adaptions

You and I are mortal but Rock & Roll will never die
Leeds Fest 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11
Give It A Name 06, 08
Sonisphere Rock Royalty 11
Slam Dunk 11

My sisters keeper-amazing inspiring book!
Then the film completely changes the ending to what it was in the book! Was really disappointed

Reading Festival 2004, 2005, 2006
Download Campervan 2009
Download Campervan 2010
Download Campervan 2011

All of Frank Darabont's adaptations of Stephen King's books are awesome, i.e. Shawshank, Green Mile and The Mist which is my favourite horror film. Lord Of The Rings extended editions are pretty good too, could never be bothered to read the books - did try twice but gave up both times.
Other than that most adaptations are completely pants and insult the books..Harry Potter, The Shining, Clive Barker's Books of Blood spring to mind.

 http://christalcavern.blo...r-temper.html?spref=fb
 http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?       

 



 

Lord of the Rings - the books are a million times better than the movies but I still loved the extended movies. I would have sat though another 10+ hours though if they added some more of the book into the films (Tom Bombadil and the Barrows for example). Looking forward to the Hobbit films :)
Reading Eat Pray Love just now and so far I approve, much better than the film so far (Julia Roberts annoys me at times).

DisturbedDenton

All of Frank Darabont's adaptations of Stephen King's books are awesome, i.e. Shawshank, Green Mile and The Mist which is my favourite horror film. Lord Of The Rings extended editions are pretty good too, could never be bothered to read the books - did try twice but gave up both times.
Other than that most adaptations are completely pants and insult the books..Harry Potter, The Shining, Clive Barker's Books of Blood spring to mind.

 
Not all of them, Prisoner of Azkaban was adapted really well.
 
Gullivers Travels the one with Jack Black in, what utter tosh. 
All 3 Discworld Tv Movies IMO were a good watch and didn't destroy the book
Animal Farm the cartoon versio(1954 ) and the 1999 one I really enjoyed both of those.

  
 

.. *cough* fight club 

From Russia With Love by Ian Fleming.
 
A superb period espionage novel and a wonderful cinema adaptation.
 
Oh, and it's James Bond. Before they got silly...

Soon oh soon the light, Pass within and soothe this endless night, And wait here for you, Our reason to be here...

EnterSandman08

Da Vinci Code and Angels & Demons.

2 of my fave books,

 
You need to read some more books. A lot more.

I think it's important to differentiate between a bad adaptation and an inaccurate one. Folks are giving amazing films like American Psycho and The Shining pelters because they're not like the books. So what? They're different things, and they're fantastic.
 
I'd far rather watch an excellent film based loosely on a book than a poorer one that follows a book unflinchingly.  Take Lord of the Rings for instance, a totally faithful retelling would be utterly tedious, because Tolkien created a great story but was no author.
 

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy.
 
Brilliant.
 
And I completely agree with Neil. Have any of you read The Godfather book? Mario Puzo wrote an ace script, but he wrote an absolutely ****e book prior to that. Thank fuck for FFC

      

 

Just finished reading World War Z by Max Brooks. Anyone else read this? Cracking read, basically a collection of short stories from a global zombie outbreak. Sounds a bit rubbish I know, but its brilliant. Anyway, a movie is in the works at the moment with Brad Pitt, really interesting to see what they do with it as its written unlike any book I've read before.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0816711/

The Lovely Bones - Amazing book but I thought the film was gash.

 

One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest - Ken Kesey
 
Completely different from the film, but it is at least as good.

nfe
I'd far rather watch an excellent film based loosely on a book than a poorer one that follows a book unflinchingly.  Take Lord of the Rings for instance, a totally faithful retelling would be utterly tedious, because Tolkien created a great story but was no Screenwriter.

Fixed.
 
Great author. Would you say Tolstoy is no author because there are slow parts that go off-track and focus on minor details?

RIP Joe                                    "You say the hill's too steep to climb.

Read Howl's Moving Castle before the film came out. Beyond ths ridiculously schmaltzy Prince character at the end the film's better. Although the book is enjoyable.
 
A Scanner Darkly is a great reframing of a story as well. Really well told by one of the greatest filmmakers around today.

RIP Joe                                    "You say the hill's too steep to climb.

Pidge

nfe
I'd far rather watch an excellent film based loosely on a book than a poorer one that follows a book unflinchingly.  Take Lord of the Rings for instance, a totally faithful retelling would be utterly tedious, because Tolkien created a great story but was no Screenwriter.

Fixed.

Great author. Would you say Tolstoy is no author because there are slow parts that go off-track and focus on minor details?

 
Might if I'd read any. It's not Tolkien's focus on description or simply having slow parts that are the issue. It's the total lack of pacing, suspense, thrill, excitement, emotional involvement...
 
It's a wonderful, evocative alternative history and a marvelous story, but it's not a good novel.

Plus, who the fuck wants all the characters bursting into song every ten minutes?
 
Midnight Express. Great read, amazing story. The film however was a total pile of balls. They opted for making the ending less exciting that the written one. Knocking out a guard and then strolling out the prison is stunningly lame compared to making your way across half the country, evading tanks and an army before finally getting help.