I've never experienced it and I'm a movie going Bookworm! I understand a movie can only be but so long so the book has to be condensed to budget and time management. In my opinion, "The Color Purple" is the closet a movie ever came to living up to the book. The absolute worse movie based on a book was, "Flowers In The Attic". HUGE disappointment!
2007-03-15 15:00:22 · 18 answers · asked by Meems 2 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
I have to agree with you I read alot and, I have read the whole V.C. Andrews series of Flowers In The Attic and that movie was garbage, I can't really say that any book that I have read that was turned into a movie was better because to me when I read I see everything in my mind then when it's made into a movie nothing is what I imagined. Though I love seeing movies I prefer the books hands down.
2007-03-15 16:11:43 · answer #1 · answered by missj127 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I personally have never seen a movie that even comes close to the book version. I realize they need to cut some parts out of the book so that the movie won't be so long. As long as you mentioned it first, the absolute worse movie base on a book was "Descent". The plot didn't even come close to the plot in the book. Sometimes I wonder if movie producers even read the book before they make a movie of it!
2007-03-15 22:12:48 · answer #2 · answered by rockyboyrussell 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Shining and Carrie are both good Stephen King novels, but their movie counterparts are equally thrilling and somewhat superior. I think it's possible for a movie to be more entertaining than the book it was made from. Some bad movie adaptions are Prozac Nation and The Davinci Code.
2007-03-15 22:17:58 · answer #3 · answered by Hazel 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No never...and in my opinion the movie the "Color Purple" was not even close to being as good as the book...but that could just be me: Walker is a very good writer!
2007-03-15 22:15:52 · answer #4 · answered by strange rain 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
LOTR: fellowship, and A Time To Kill were as good as the book and had only small changes, but the only movie that I saw that was better then the book um....sorry to say this...Was the stupid batman movie with jim carey, and tommy lee jones...as bad as a movie as it was, it was a lot better then the book, which I think was the worst book I ever read.
2007-03-16 00:33:41 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The original Psycho with Janet Leigh and Anthony Perkins is much better than -- and different from-- the book.
Also, the movie Secretary is better than the short story it is based on.
2007-03-16 00:36:45 · answer #6 · answered by Ms. Switch 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I enjoyed the Green Mile the movie much more then the book. Maybe because of the acters, but that is the first time I've enjoy the movie more then the book
2007-03-15 22:28:13 · answer #7 · answered by Mle5210 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
alot of people are going to wanna burn me alive for this but i honestly feel that the Lord of The Rings was a better movie than book. I enjoyed the book but i felt it really lagged in places for example it took frodo like 10 years to actually leave the shire when he found out the dark one was coming after him, and the ending was very anticlimatic so in the end i felt that peter jackson stayed close enough to the oringinal novel to please hardcore fans whilke cutting out all the parts that just feel like filler and adding an ending that wasn't just it's over i threw the ring in the volcano
2007-03-15 22:29:34 · answer #8 · answered by OmegaBlue 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The Cat In The Hat movie was better than the book. Same for the Grinch. That's about it.
2007-03-15 23:27:14 · answer #9 · answered by sexmagnet 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Oh my goodness! I had to think hard on this question - my answer is No, not yet....amazing....you're so right about "The Color Purple" - Alice Walker's book versus Stephen Spielberg's movie is a close one.
2007-03-15 22:16:54 · answer #10 · answered by Renee 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋