and the film has been as good as the book, and if so what book/film.
2007-09-29 06:05:11 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Books & Authors
Hi there.
Jurassic Park was a good book and a better film.
Holes was a good book and good film.
So it can be done!
Cheers, Steve.
2007-09-29 06:31:31 · answer #1 · answered by Steve J 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well, actually I think it's pretty common for a film to be as good as (or better than) a book. For example, a lot of Alfred Hitchcock movies were based on books--and yet probably not too many people remember that nowadays (case in point). Any movie of The Christmas Carol is likely to be better than the book because they'll keep the dialogue and situations and get rid of Dickens' horrible hammy overbearing asides to the reader. The Godfather's reputation as a film seems to be a great deal higher than Puzo's book's is. Then there's Jaws (Spielberg vs Benchley)...and the lame lame short story by Van Doren Stern compared to Capra's It's a Wonderful Life. I think (if you had enough time) you could come up with a pretty huge list of movies that were at least as good as their written-word sources. It's just two different worlds--movies vs novels; and if you've ever tried to write a screenplay, you'll know how blessedly (or cursedly) difficult a thing that is to do.
2007-09-29 22:30:43 · answer #2 · answered by Omar Cayenne 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
For the most part, a lot of plots lose something when they are turned into films.
One notable exception is :~
The Crow Road - Ian Banks
In 1996 it was adapted into a 4 hour, four part series for BBC TV.
While they did cut at least one {non-relavant, but funny} scene that was in the book, Ian Banks himself said {and this was taped for a Channel 4 series} that he was amazed and extreamly happy with the adaptaition, and that he felt it was better than the book!
2007-09-29 20:21:36 · answer #3 · answered by Lady Silver Rose * Wolf 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I have yet to come across a film which is better than the book it was taken from. That isn't to say that there aren't many good adaptations because there are, although there are quite a few terrible ones too.
2007-09-29 15:56:31 · answer #4 · answered by Chipmunk 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Generally , the book is better that the film , it's so hard to get a good adaptation . "To kill a Mockingbird" may be an exception , although the film necessarily left out a lot .
However , it is possible to make a good film from a lousy book , i.e. "Jurassic Park" .....
2007-09-29 13:37:07 · answer #5 · answered by Hippie 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's very rare, "Atonement" made a very middle of the road film from an excellent book. And conversely, I suspect "Casablanca" would make a very pedestrian novel.
Best I can think of is the Harry Potter films, they stuck to the plot but showed the magical effects
2007-09-29 13:15:13 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
books and movies just do different things. a book can describe every single thing to the smell of the atmosphere to the innermost thoughts of the character and with movies you can't get the sensory details besides what the actors say about it and the inner thoughts are well just it's not the same as when you read them in a book. but there's one movie and book that i do like from when i was little it was The Indian in the Cupboard. that was a good book and movie.
2007-09-29 15:32:49 · answer #7 · answered by maria92588 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think only some movie adaptation that as good as the book. for example: LOTR and Painted Veil. most of them not as good. the ugliest is Eragon. honestly I can believe I payed for watch that crap.
If the movie able to capture the detail and emotion in the book (easier to have that in book, it's written), then the movie will be as good as the book, but if it's not, it could be some disaster like Eragon or Da Vinci Code (not as ugly as Eragon but still... from Ron Howard and Tom Hanks? it's ugly. I expect more)
2007-09-29 13:19:53 · answer #8 · answered by lynossa 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Exorcist by William Peter Blatty was amazing as a book and 'almost' better as a film. Scared the beejeezus out me!!!
2007-09-29 14:49:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Literature rarely translates well to the screen. Film-makers inevitably have to leave out much of the subtlety of the book.
Having said that, I think that The Simpsons version of Edgar Allan Poe's poem "The Raven" was a work of genius.
2007-09-29 17:21:42 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Henry James's short story 'The turn of the Screw' was adapted in 1961 and renamed 'The Innocents' starring Deborah Kerr. It was also adapted by the BBC in 1998. Both versions are superb and every bit as good as the story.
2007-09-29 13:11:31 · answer #11 · answered by Catherine1 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋