What are the best (and worst) book to movie adaptations?
Reading all the comments from our recent Harry Potter vs Twilight post made me think of other book to movie adaptations and how they compare. Judging by the highest grossing films of the past 10 years, we certainly love a good adaptation or remake. Even looking at the current list of films in cinemas gives you a sense of déjà vu: Angels and Demons, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Hannah Montana, Ice Age 3, Night at the Museum 2, Star Trek 11, Terminator Salvation, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen. What do they all have in common? Each one is a sequel or remake of an old movie, book or TV show.
One adaptation coming out soon is My Sister’s Keeper, a movie based on the best selling Jodi Picoult novel. Like all of her books, it’s a family based drama with a legal predicament, this time a daughter who wants to claim medical emancipation from her parents. Only problem is, she was created using genetic engineering with the intention of saving her critically ill sister and without her kidney, her sister might die.
It’s a fascinating topic and the book was definitely a tear jerker however I’m fearful: will the movie live up to the book? In my opinion, a lot of movie adaptations aren’t anywhere near as good as the book. Think about The Da Vinci Code, Hitchiker’s Guide To The Galaxy, even the old favourite Harry Potter. None of those movies managed the capture the magic of the books. Fairly unsurprising considering they’re condensing 300 odd pages into a 2 hour flick.
Of course not all book to film adaptations are flops. Personally I loved the original 1971 adaptation of Roald Dahl’s Charlie and the Chocolate Factory starring Gene Wilder. Even though I read the book first, with its chocolate river and lick-able wallpaper, the movie brought a whole new dimension to the story. However, although I enjoyed the altered version, the original author didn’t. According to Peach, the reason why the film was called Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory is because “Roald Dahl didn’t like the direction they were taking with the movie and he refused to allow them to call it Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.”
I also really enjoy Jane Austen books on screen. I’ve always found the books to be incredibly slow and boring however when they’re condensed into film format, they’re actually quite entertaining. And let’s face it, although they may not be historically accurate, the pretty dresses and eye candy of Colin Firth doesn’t hurt either.
How about you? Are there any book to movie adaptations that make you cringe? Or are there any films that improve the experience of the book?
Caitlin
Community Manager
- Rating:
(3 votes, average: 4.00) - Permalink
- Comments (80)
Loading ...
Subscribe
i have this book/movie which is the best/ it is awesome as u should read it all of the series
The movie that was made from the book The Running Man written by Stephen King under the name Richard Bachman could have been such a good movie Had anyone involved in the project actually read it.
I agree. A lot of movies can’t capture the full potential and magic of the story, but they are still entertaining.
Catch 22 captured the essence of the book, though books always contain heaps more which can’t be delivered on film . What a shame that so many non-readers don’t realise this and think they are “getting it ” .
Best: Lord of the Rings
Worst: Eragon
The Divinci code is the worst adaptation i have ever seen! I know that book to movie is never the same, but to leave out major plot lines is ridiculous. That said, Tom Hanks is an amazing actor, but this was just bad.
Worst movie adaption in the genres I like … Will Smith’s “I am Legend”. That is a great book, written way ahead of its time and his movie version is terrible, a blashphemy even.
Also although I didn’t particularly enjoy the book Twilight, I thought the movie was far worse, it was disjointed and very difficult to follow even though I had read the book first, my partner hadn’t read the book and thought the movie was boring and didn’t make much sense at all.
Harry Potter has been done well given the content and size of the books. Mind you I thought the latest movie was the worst so far, too much talking and not much else going on, it left out a lot of interesting character interaction.
Well… if we’re talking about books, can we include Manga?
If so, then it goes without saying that ‘Dragonball: Evolution’ completely MAIMED the original Manga and anime. Honestly. You couldn’t get much further away from the story, the concept, the plot, the characters…. everything. Absolutely terrible.
The Hunt For Red October – Tom Clancy
Great book and the movie was good as well.
The biggest failure for movies based on a book is movies generally have a time frame to show all. A book has no such restrictions.
In “The Hunt For Red October” there is a rather lengthy scene in the book with captains from the Red October and the Dallas together hiding in a bay from other Russian subs looking for the Red October, it was great to read, but did not make it to the movie.. why? I would guess it comes down to what I said earlier, movies have a time frame they generally adhere too. That’s my opinion on that.
At the end of the day, nothing beats a good book.
we have to remember that a Films and books are two different mediums and require different approaches. If you filmed a book as written it would be one large talk fest explaining what is already being shown visualy on screen. A good screen writer will take the essential elements of a story and create a script which allows a good director to display the story in a visual manner that will satisfy those who have read the book and inspire those whom have not read the book, to read it! If I view a film and enjoy it II will seek out the book to further fill in the story and to see how well it has been adapted!
Stephen King’s ‘It’ is a fantastic book, but the movie is a poor attempt at transferring the powers of the imagination to film…
but in saying that – I find that reading is a much more enjoyable experience than staring at a screen for 2 hours.. I much prefer to use my imagination.
Books all the way..!
=]
best: a time to kill
worst: the firm
Novel: Wake in Fright by Kenneth Cook
This is my pick for the best screen adaptation of a novel. the film made originally in 1970, has this year been digitally restored. It stars Gary Bond,Jack Thompson,Chips Rafferty and John Meillon.
Journalist Kenneth Cook based the story on his own experiences of an Aussie culture that many of us would rather not know about. Yet it is also Aussie dry, ironic humour at its best. When I saw the original black and white film back in the seventies I found it disturbing, but entirely recognisable.
I don’t want to give away too much for those who want to see and read it. I will say that for me, it was an altogether in your face,confronting revelation of the ugly Australian who is at the same time capable of a self deprecating humour that is kind of redeeming. I think we’ve moved on a bit from that very black place.
It’s brilliantly done;worth reading and seeing.
The best book to movie adaptation I have seen would have to be the Lord of the Rings and definitely Jane Austen, Lorna Doone.
Probably the worst would have to be Eragon and I really hope that they don’t make the rest of the quartet, they left out far too many main plot lines to do the rest of them justice.
harry potter 3 is the best book to movie adaption
For some reason no-one can manage to make a great film from Stephen King’s horror stories, but his non-horrors The Green Mile and Shawshank Redemption were fantastic.
Harry Potter films are sensational – probably under strict supervision from the author!
My fav books to movies “Green Mile” and “Shawshank Redemption”. Both proboably the best Stephen King books taken from the page to the screen.
hi omg it is such a good book but the new version in the movie is way better
You want a bad adaptation? try the dark is rising. The book is brilliant and a part of five which is why they probably made it hoping for another harry potter. The only things they kept, the title and the over all premise of light v dark. A travesty of a movie. But hands up for shawshank redemption – brilliant book or rather short story and movie. A side point short stories seem to adapt better than full novels.
the :exorcist: was a great book, the movie was quite tame by comparison.
Well..then again alothough the movie doesnt capture the full potential of the book it is only because the movie only shows 1/3 or 1/4 of the book. The movie can be entertaining but at times it can not. for example, Dragonball-Z is a cartoon loved bvy all children especially when your asian. I loved it. Hoku was like a hero. But then…they had to make Goku a white in the movie. It was not entertaining for me at all. [i'm not saying it was bad. Goku's role played by a white just kinda daunted me.] Where as if it was a movie for example like Inkheart. The movie was great but some of the things were taken from Inkspell not exactly from Inkheart But the characters were perfect. [to me.]
I hope you understand that my comment was not meant to be offending. just the way that i see. it. Thanks.
American Psycho, book was awesome but the movie was like a parody!
Have to agree with Ruby there. Eragon was one of the most terrible movie adaptations I have ever had the misfortune to sit through. There is absolutely no way they will be able to make Eldest, considering what they did in Eragon.
I don’t think Stormbreaker quite did it’s paperback version justice either. While it was a great action film, it didn’t have the same feel to it as Horowitz’s writing.
Worst movie-book – LAWNMOWER MAN – the book was about a half man/half goat who mowed lawns by eating it, then ate the main character… the movie… enough said
best movie-book – I will return to Stephen King for this one – MISERY – Kathy bates played the psycho fan absolutely perfectly, and the only plot lines left out were irrelevant or silly – i.e running ovr the police officer with… a LAWNMOWER!!!!
I LOVED TWILIGHT!!!!! But the movie left out the most basic things! The Cullen home is old NOT modern, Edwards room is black and gold NOT white and cream! These things are EASY but were never included in the film ( I know there is more but for people who have not read twilight i do not want to spoil it!)
Best: Lord of the rings. Read a bit of the first book. Great stuff, the film still as great. Love it. A lot of effort mustve been put into the characterisation and camera angles and creatures. i LOVE it
Best: Lord of the rings. Read a bit of the first book. Great stuff, the film still as great. Love it. A lot of effort mustve been put into the characterisation and camera angles and creatures. i LOVE it.
Jane Austen; reading em at school like horrible and so dry but the films make it so much better.
Worst: I’m sorry Harry Potter/Rowling, but HP the 4th one AND the ones that followed SUCKED. Ok i HATE twilight the books, but my obsessed friends dragged me along to the movie. Then we came out hating the movie. Pattinson is retarded as an actor,a dn kirsten bell does a boring job as bella.
predetor vs alien was a great series of books detailing the whole backstory to the different races, yet the movie adaption was weak with no real story.
One of the best 1st books I have ever read was “The Power of One” by Bryce Courtney. The movie was an absolute disgrace, missing complete main characters. Theme, plot and storylines were completely butchered and was barely recognisable.
Orson Welles’ The Trial is the best adaptation of a book, a masterpiece in both an adaptation and a film n its own right. all the 1940’s adaptations of cain and chandler novels into noirs are great as well
Eragon was a bad adaption. And the da vinci code. The best would be willy wonka because it ad everything in it.
Best:Harry Potter ‘The Philosopher’s Stone’. Just as the book painted in my minds eye.
Worst…”Flowers In The Atic” Cringe! Should not have been done. There are a few really that come into this category are’nt there?
Worst: The Power Of One [Bryce Courtenay]
Best: No Country For Old Men [Cormac McCarthy]
Well, I am legend is a remake of “Omega Man” already. I liked that earlier one heaps more. Same for Flight of the Phoenix. That remake was shite, so was the “Poseidon” remake…but I digress…. Anyway, people need to boycott these things….
Jane Austen! Give me a break…how many versions do we need of “Pride and Prejudice” and “Sense and sensibility” do we need?
Wasn’t Shakespeare’s “Romeo and Juliet” adaptation with DeCaprio imaginative though?
I still would like to see a proper adaptation of “The 39 Steps”; the latest 2008 BBC TV version was a joke. As long as the script becomes a bit more natural and intelligent and the whole thing more authentic.
I recenlty saw “Wait until Dark” (Audrey Hepburn, Alan Arkin) again…now THAT was a well made movie. Screen adaptations of stage plays are generally easier to do admittedly
I agree with Connie. I think Eragon is THE WORST EVER MOVIE ADAPTION!!! They have left so many things out and altered what’s left of it. My brother, not having read the book, was totally failed by that movie. All these irrelevant ideas entered his head!!!!!!!!
the da vinci code. worst book to movie adaption. The ending was rushed and veered away from the story line- why?
It was almost as if the script writers got fed up and just wanted to hurry up and get it over with, the actors chosen the play the characters were just as I imagined when reading the book- a great story, great topic but suffered in the adaption.
Worst book- great movie- Jaws by Peter Benchley.
The book was tiresome and lethargic with the mafia a bigger threat than the shark. The movie, bless Steven Spielberg, was great – still is. 34 years on I still worry when I go to the beach- and I definately got a bigger boat. This was one book that was improved with a bit of artistic licence.
Best – Lord of the Rings
Worst – Harry Potter
Worst – The Power of One, the book was awesome, the movie was terrible. Wish I’d never watched it.
Best – The Devil Wears Prada, I think the movie was even better than the book in this case! Meryl Streep was brilliant casting!
The Notebook. The book was great; the movie was pathetic.
Any Stephen King book turns out to be a disaster of a movie, not sure why, but the books are fantastic, maybe the movies are too low budget.
I think the original Willy Wonka is by far the best, sorry Johnny Depp (and I love him to death) but the new movie lacked something, they shouldn’t have done it.
Twilight should never have been made into a movie.
I would spit on Stephenie Meyer if I got the chance.
Heres hoping her new career goes down the pooper.
angelas ashes one long moan
worst: adaptaptation of Poul Andersons High Crusade. great book terrible movie worst adaptation I’ve ever seen. barely followed the plot of the book at all after the 1st 10-15 minutes .
the wilight book was good but the movie was terrible
i think Harry Potter half blood prince the movie is a shocker and the worse movie so far i cant believe how pathetic it was and it just ended it had very little intense scenes like all the others i have read allbooks and this is the worst movie so far i hope J Rowlings really makes sure they do alot better next time
SHOCKING!!!!!!!
Probaly the best is harry potter and the worst i really don’t know!
Best: The Notebook
Worst: … Stormbreaker
I read Eragon and the first half of the book is about raising the actual dragon and the movie just went over that part in 10 minutes. yea so that was disappointing.
Marley and me was pretty good.
I think the best movie book adaptation is The Green Mile (Stephen King) The characters in the movie were the ones i would have picked
The worst was Flowers in the attic( Virginia Andrews) the book was brilliant but the movie fell short
worst: The Black Dahlia
best: Stand By Me
The best, definitely Lord of the Rings Trilogy. The worst Sahara, the book was great, the film … crap
The best would have to be The Green Mile, by Stephen King.
I believe that the new harry potter film totally cuts out the good parts of the book. i know that the fighting scenes and the funeral is going to be in the next movie, but that is going to ruin the next movie.
Worst adaptation has to be The Night Watch and The Day Watch films. Despite having read the books I had no idea how the two were supposed to be related, beyoond the title.
Eragon, by far, has been the worst for me. I had no problem with the actors, but they story was barely stuck to and some things were altered that didn’t need to be. Another one would be The Hitchiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, a fun movie in itself, but nothing compared to the book.
Twilight was definatly one of the crappiest book to movie adaptations, it did the book no justice at all.
The worst adaption of a book to a film I’ve ever seen is “House of the Spirits” Most of the story was lost in the translation, closely followed by “Windtalkers” why wasn’t it just called “Nicholas Cage” because there was very little about the Windtalkers. “Emma” with Gwyneth Paltrow who just couldn’t keep her forehead uncreased bored me to sobs. Ladies of good character kept smooth faces in those far of days. Didn’t the researchers tell you that, Gwynie?
On the other hand, “Chocolat” is fabulous on many levels, so is the TV series “North and South” from the book by Elizabeth Gaskell. “Remains of the Day” from the novel by Japanese-British author Kazuo Ishiguro is always at the top of my favourites list in every aspect.
G.
The worst by far is The DaVinci Code. Absolutely loved the book but the movie was terrible!
Anne of Green Gables, 1986 version , on following the story and capturing the characters i don’t think you can bet it.
Best has to be hands down “Lord of the Rings”. It stayed as true to the books as possible without making a 6 hour movie. You don’t feel like you are really missing too much.
Worst is “Angels and Demons”. Hello????? where was the motive?????? I was waiting for the true motive to be revealed and it never was.
Worst was Gone With The Wind… The movie eliminated 2 of Scarlett’s children which in the book were pivotal to the plot. The Movie on its own was great but since I read the book I have not been able to watch the movie all the way through again.
Best: Pride and Prejudice BBC edition, although I could read the book in less then half the time it was on screen, it remains one of the all time classic adaptions. Faithful to the book, I have yet to hear a complaint about it from the female members of the audience.
After years of avoiding the movie I finally gathered the courage to watch Rabbit Proof Fence. A wonderful story. I haven’t read the book yet but I am going to
I personally loved the movie adaptation of The Watchmen. It preserved a lot of the tension and atmosphere of the comic, and the characters were true. The big problem I had with it was that they maimed the climax, but I can understand it. I also really loved the movie based on Terry Pratchett’s book Hogfather. While not totally true to the book, it presented the material effectively and without losing the charm or humour of the original novel. The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas worked really well, too. The one book-based movie I despise is Hitchiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. They did read the book, right? Skimming for names doesn’t count…
The best is “the lord of the rings” series and the worst would have to be “Hitch hikers guide to the galaxy’.
Thats my opinion, cheers
By far the Movie “twilight” was the most boring badly acted movie. I believe Lord of the rings did a good adaptation and the Potter series also.
The stand-out case of the film bettering the book is Milos Forman’s One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest, which excised lots of the preachy and, well, boring bits from Ken Kesey’s novel. Godfather I and II are better that Mario Puzo’s novel, too. And for an Australian example you can catch at selected cinemas right now, Wake in Fright. Filmed by a Canadian and starring two Englishmen, it’s a masterpiece, which makes it a little better than Kenneth Cook’s very good novel.
Coraline and The Lord Of The Rings are both books that had great movie versions
Twilight the movie had HORRIBLE acting. Edward Cullen was definitely not as velvet talking, smooth walking as a vampire should be.
BEST: Clan of the Cave Bear. Heard rumour the author Jean M Auel didn’t particularly like it but I thought it was extremely well done. Hanging for the other books to become movies.
WORST: Flowers in the Attic. Went horribly off storyline right into the sublime.
Off topic but remakes bug the heck out of me. Can’t stand what they have done to Cheaper By The Dozen, Yours Mine and Ours etc…lightweight, predigested and pathetic.
Glad I got that off my chest..lol.
Best adaptations would have to be the BBC TV adaptations of the 60’s and 70’s such as All Creatures Great and Small as they actually follow the book well.
Also Peach is wrong, The reason for the change of name was, as stated in the interviews, due to marketing the merchandise tie-ins. If you have the dvd of Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory you will hear this in the interviews and you will actually see Roald Dahl working with the crew on set.
Yes as someone said earlier the Running man book could have been made into a great movie but it was instead an awful cheesy action flick that totally misses the point of the book. Fight club was right on though
NONE of the Stephen King movies have been anything on the books – a complete dispappointment every time.
Especially The Shining – the lovely, telepathic black man didn’t die in the book, but he only had 5 minutes in the movie!
A movie I saw about 25 years ago was John Carpenter’s ‘Christine’. I had read the book written by Stephen King and was looking forward to a thoroughly good horror. I can honestly say that I was terribly disappointed. John Carpenter either did not read Stephen’s book properly or he didn’t understand it. The movie could not have been described as even a thriller, let alone a horror. John Carpenter did Stephen King a huge injustice.
Worst-Congo
thank you! I really liked this post!
thank you! I really liked this post!