Comments on: 20 Movies Better Than The Books They Were Based On

By: Derke

Derke — Sun, 03 Jul 2011 15:07:36 +0000

EXCELLENT list. I agree with all except for Harry Potter, for which i think the films are vastly inferior. Psycho, Jaws, The Godfather, Fight Club, Wizard of Oz, and Atonement are all GREAT examples of average quality novels made into far superior films. I also agree with LOTR – the first movie, before Jackson resorted to cheesy, Braveheart-style melodramatics, WAS superior to the source material. It’s a shame you didn’t back up your choices with solid arguments, though.

By: Sneak

Sneak — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 07:16:39 +0000

Forest Gump is one of my favorite books. I hate the movie version. The book was an absurd, twisted comedy… something like an epic John Waters movie. On top of that, the main character, Forest, was a 300 pound southern retarded man. How someone could read that book and think of Tom Hanks for the roll is completely beyond me. It’s funny because the same director made a very faithful adaptation of Carl Sagan’s novel, Contact. I have no idea why he didn’t give the same consideration to Winston Groom’s material. Forest Gump the movie sucks!

By: Jenny

Jenny — Thu, 10 Feb 2011 18:57:10 +0000

While I have (reluctantly) accepted that the book Forrest Gump is not everyone’s cup of tea (although I think it’s the funniest book I’ve every read) – you absolutely lost me at The English Patient. The book is amazing, the best thing about the movie is the cinematography.

By: supersig

supersig — Sun, 30 Jan 2011 05:08:38 +0000

You have obviously never read many of these books. The “Bourne” movies are no where near as good as the books. I was really disappointed when I saw these movies. The storyline is completely bastardized to (by the director’s own admissions) inject the director’s view of American foreign policy. If a director wants to make a statement fine, but to completely change the plot of the story in order to do so is shameful… and unfair to the great plot lines in the book. You also have never read The Godfather, because it too is a marvelous book, the movie is great (one of my favorites) but the book is at least as good as the movie. Your reasoning for Gone With The Wind is as absurd as the conclusion that you came to. The novel is one of the greatest in modern literature, a true modern classic, and because it translated well into film and changed film forever, you found the movie to be superior?? That really makes no sense whatsoever. The reason most movies can’t compare to their novel counterparts is because of time constraints and the inability to express inner dialogue that so permeates a novel. Any movie that took 4 hours to tell the tale would have a shot at coming close to the novel, short of doing this, it would be hard for ANY movie to be better than the novel. You should rethink life in general.

By: wewef

wewef — Thu, 27 Jan 2011 20:56:08 +0000

the wizard of oz is actually not originally a children’s book. it is an allegory about the populist party during the late 19th century. so as a children’s book, obviously the movie is going to be better, there’s no real depth to it..

By: Anon

Anon — Thu, 30 Dec 2010 07:56:05 +0000

OP is a faggot

By: C.

C. — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 08:26:23 +0000

I totally agree with the people who say this list is sorely lacking any explanation or justification of its choices. Utterly disappointing. What is the point?

By: OJex

OJex — Tue, 17 Aug 2010 17:44:18 +0000

the first Narnia movie need to be on this list, specifically because it doesnt skip the war between the white witchs forces and aslans forces. that scene in the movie was epic and the fact that the book skipped it is ridiculous.

By: Becca

Becca — Fri, 13 Aug 2010 20:03:01 +0000

I have to disagree with almost everything on here, alas. The Goblet of Fire was even worse than Prisoner of Azkaban, and it’s insulting that anyone would say it was faithful to the book. Very little was done correctly, and I have pity for people expecting the last film to make sense what with everything being cut. An award does not a good movie make. Also, Fellowship of the Ring is an amazing movie and book, but the book will always win out. However, I can concede that people who don’t like reading will like the movie way more as Tolkien is a bit of an acquired taste. I agree with someone above saying this is a non-reader’s list. All movies are better than the book if you’ve never read it and/or are illiterate.

By: M

Wed, 04 Aug 2010 04:03:11 +0000

How could a movie be better than a book because it is a “faithful adaptation” of it?