Book to Movie Adaptions - How many have you seen that work well?

[dragon wench]

I ask this because I feel that, in general, many movie adapations from books don't seem to transition to the screen very well.

The only such case I can think of where I've truly found the movie version to be on par with the book has been in the situation of The English Patient. Indeed, I think the movie version might even be better than the book.

But, this is rare, IMO.

Thoughts?

[Lestat]

I think the LOTR actually worked out very well. And as someone who has read through the LOTR at least 5 times in two different languages, whose first book he read in English was the Silmarillion and has several books about Tolkien and his work, I can be considered, I think a fan of his work (though not blind to its faults) and even slightly deranged.

Another movie I can think of is "The Shining".

But then King and Tolkien are fairly "filmable" authors, rather visual writers.

Once one accepts that the medium has its own requirements, and that there is such a thing as being too faithful to the original, good films can be made, and one should judge the movie on its own merits, not on the faithfulness to the original.

[Ashen]

Hah I absolutely hated LotR for example. I think it did one unforgivable thing - it perverted and distorted the characters and that is the one thing the Master did not want:

"I should resent perversion of the characters (and do resent it, so far as it appears in this sketch) even more than the spoiling of the plot and scenery." ~ Letters of JRR Tolkien, #210

That is not the only problem I have with them far from it but it is the main one. And yes I am a Tolkien fanatic and a purist.

I agree it's rare to see it. I do like Doctor Zhivago, filmed after Pasternak's novel.

[Denethorn]

Frank Darabont's movie adaptations of Steven King's novels are of exceptional quality. I've read one or two King books but not many so I can't claim to be a fanatic.

Similarly, Rodriguez' 'translation' of the graphic novella series Sin City was excellent.

It all depends on how willing the directors are to sacrifice Hollywood elements and support for an honest adaptation.

[shana]

I enjoyed the movie Memoirs of a Geisha. I think it was a faithful adaptation of the book.

[C Elegans]

Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange is better than Burgess novel.

[Vicsun]

Fight Club looked good on the big screen, but I think that's because Palahniuk's writing isn't that great.

[mr_sir]

The Green Mile film is almost as good as the book IMO so I think they did a good job with that.

[fable]

One of David Lean's earliest films was a wonderful version of Oliver Twist (1948), with some expressionistic elements to the lighting and magnificent performances all around. (Alec Guinness was ***in, and Robert Newton was Bill Sikes.)

[Georgi]

Re Stephen King, I think his books that are supernatural rather than horror translate better to the screen, like The Green Mile and The Shawshank Redemption. However, with several of his horror-type books, like It and The Stand, I think there's a lot more depth in the books that isn't conveyed in the adaptations; particularly It is quite surreal at the end, as I recall, although it has been years since I read it.

On a different note, Nick Hornby's books translate very well to film. High Fidelity one might have thought would suffer from being transposed from London to Chicago, but it really preserved the spirit of the book. I wouldn't say the films are better than the books though, but equal.

American Psycho - the book is incredibly gory, and also tedious to read, with very detailed descriptions of clothes etc. Okay, it has a point, 80s yuppie materialism, but on film one shot says it all. Also, the most over-the-top distasteful parts of the novel have been taken out, but it still preserves the idea of it.

Finally, since it is released here this week, The Da Vinci Code I suspect may work better as a film than a book, because it can't possibly have so many infuriating end-of-chapter cliffhangers. Still, to be better than that book isn't saying much.

[TonyMontana1638]

Originally Posted by C Elegans

Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange is better than Burgess novel.

Bah...

The Godfather was infinitely better than the book itself (and my favorite movie), as was Schindler's List. To Kill a Mockingbird wasn't as good as the movie, but it was still a classic much like One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest: Gregory Peck and Jack Nicholson made those movies amazing, respectively. The Silence of the Lambs, though I never read the book, and Gone with the Wind which I did (the movie was way better). A Streetcar Named Desire was pretty faithful to the play... I'm also a big fan of Neil Simon's The Cheap Detective if anybody's familiar with it. Capote, Rosemary's Baby and Breakfast at Tiffanys were all great movies but I never read the books. I also think the movie Catch 22 was very underrated and I highly recommend it, for those who have or haven't read the book alike.

[shana]

The movie Forest Gump was MUCH better than the book.

[TonyMontana1638]

Forrest Gump was a book?!

[shana]

@Tony--Yes. It was written by Winston Groom, and was Forrest's story but in his own words. Ex: "tuda i starded skool and joned the futbal teem". It was painful to read! Still not sure why I even bothered to finish it.