Books of Films vs. Films of Books

[Guest John Hancock]

Went to see World War Z and This Is The End today taking full advantage of my unlimited cinema card from now on I think :)

 

World War Z I thought was a really good movie, I've not read the book so I don't know how close to It Is but what i saw I enjoyed, one of the better movies in that genre I'd say

 

They're very different. The book is sort of a fake history book about the same event that the film is set in. Some of the things that happen in the book happen in the film, and they have the same name, that's about it.

[Guest Eddie]

I was told the book was written In that manner, It was described as a diary to me though, I may give It a read at some point but I now try reading book after I've seen films based on them nowadays as i enjoy watching movies more than reading and It doesn't bother me as much when they're different when I check them out in that order, a weird little fact about me for you there feel free to log it in the file 'nobody cares' :lol

[Guest John Hancock]

I think I have the same thing you do, where reading a book that's different from a film I like is fine, but seeing a film that's different from a book I like is annoying.

 

The book World War Z is just a general collection of notes, first hand accounts and interviews that's been published by the United Nations after the zombies have been sorted out to try and document what happened.

[etz 78]

I do generally feel like books are better than their movies, but that's more to do with the power of books than it is to do with the movies themselves. Plus, I can stop reading a book whenever I want and start again in the exact spot later, I have to watch the movie to the end at one go.

[Guest John Hancock]

I don't know about that, there's hardly any fiction books I can finish without forcing myself, and I could watch a film I absolutely hated just for a laugh. I think it's swings and roundabouts, there's books that are better as films (American Psycho) and films that are better as books (Alice in Wonderland).

 

One thing I would add though is that, in my personal experience, I've never watched a film (or, for that matter, T.V. show) of a comic that's better than the original comic, even the comic films I've really liked.

[Guest Eddie]

I'm the same way with books, I really do have to force myself through them by the end, Stephen King's IT was a major culprit i really enjoyed the first 1000 pages but the last few hundred were a hard slog, the adaption I'd seen prior thoug which added a lot to the book when i read It, It almost seemed better. I can also watch a film for the laugh and if i'm halfway through i can easily pick up where I left off

 

 

Just out of interest what are your favourite comic book adaptions?

[Guest Anime Otaku]

I think it definitely depends on the books for instance, despite being wildly different books, some of the Harry Potter books and a Japanese book called Battle Royale definitely improved due to some extraneous details that didn't add that much to he story (and IMO in Battle Royale's case, were detrimental) being trimmed out in their adaptions.

[Maxximus 353]

I'm the same way with books, I really do have to force myself through them by the end, Stephen King's IT was a major culprit i really enjoyed the first 1000 pages but the last few hundred were a hard slog

 

I do that, The Stand and 'Salem's Lot back to back every five years er so and love every page of it. It's weird I know. I'm not gay, but if King wrote me gay in a story I wouldn't mind.

[Guest Jayfunk]

I am legend is a prefect example of a book which is far better than the film, hated the film, I was sooo looking forward to it, but then we got Will Smith Action Hero rather than the massively flawed character in the book.

[Paul 584]

The only time I prefered a film to the book was Fight Club. I didnt see the American Psycho film, but loved the book even though its a hard read.

[Guest John Hancock]

Fight Club's a really good example of a film that's miles better than the book. I'd, controversially, say that Apocalypse Now is better than Heart of Darkness, and, less controversially, Dr. Strangelove is better than Red Alert.

[Maxximus 353]

A Clockwork Orange is better than A Clockwork Orange. At least I thought so.

 

Hellraiser might be better than The Hellbound Heart. Could be wrong though. Haven't read or watched either since the 90's.

[Guest John Hancock]

Hellraiser is definitely better than The Hellbound Heart, mostly because the story was pretty dumb, and it was all about seeing cool stuff, and it's very hard to type out "Jeeeeeezeeeeeeers wwwweptah" and "WE'LL TARE YOU SOH-WAH-LAH. AP-AAAAAAART." as awesomely as the film vocalised them.

[DC 536]

I enjoyed both versions of The Crow equally, but they are quite different in a lot of aspects.

[Guest Jimmy Redman]

I'd, controversially, say that Apocalypse Now is better than Heart of Darkness

 

I'm not entirely sure. Heart of Darkness was torture the first time in Yr 11 English class, but it really grew on me. Maybe it's just the historian in me who prefers something set in the 19th century than the 20th. I think the film has more cool stuff like explosions, the smell of napalm in the morning and Marlon Brando, but the book actually fleshes out the story (of Kurtz and all that) a lot better.