this post was submitted on 30 Nov 2023
0 points (50.0% liked)

Books

1 readers
1 users here now

founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
 

I LOVE Alfonso Cuarón’s sci-fi action movie Children of Men. I’ve watched maybe six times and every time, the ending always almost brings me to tears. So when I learned it was adapted from P.D. James’ book of the same name, it was a no-brainer deciding what my next book would be.

After finishing the book, it wasn’t difficult to reach to the conclusion that I enjoyed the movie better.

While James’ book gives a more in-depth look at how human infertility and humanity’s slow death march towards extinction affects the sexual dynamic between men and women and almost demented ways humans try to cope with a world without children or a race of dead men walking, I feel the book dedicates WAY too much time describing the failing of human civilization and the Regrets and guilt of Theo Faron. It’s not even until after 2/3 through the book where it feels like the plot and story are properly paced and stuff of consequence actually begin to happen.

The film’s adaptation by, comparison, feels consistent in its pacing and the world building and woe-is-mes of Theo feel more compact a take up less of the audience’s time.

What books do you feel were worse than its film adaptation and why?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] palm-tree-queen@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago (3 children)

The Notebook + Crazy Rich Asians

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Midnight_Muse@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

Chocolat. Whoever read that boring mess of a book and turned it into this charming movie deserves an award!

[–] dirtinmyhead@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

Not a movie, but I hated the Haunting of Hill House book with a burning passion

[–] CaptainJackWagons@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

FlashForward was a much better TV series than it was a book. The book felt like it was written by an incel while the show felt like a compelling mystery thriller.

[–] Peemster99@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

I absolutely love the movie The Ice Storm but I thought the novel was completely generic 90s lit fic.

[–] princeofsaiyans89@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

Starship Troopers.

[–] No-vem-ber@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

Call Me By Your Name.

The film is indescribably atmospheric, erotic, emotional, charming, memorable

The book is just... So... horny... and tbh pretty confronting

[–] Clarkthebarista@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

Dawn of the Dead

[–] KernelKrusto@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

The Swedish adaptation of Let the Right One In. The movie was much tighter than the novel to its benefit.

[–] Cabnbeeschurgr@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

The Maze Runner series was alright as a book series, but the last chronological one sucked. Really wrote itself into a corner, the movie handled it much better even if the pacing was a bit ass

[–] Sky_Father_@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

Forrest Gump.

[–] kidigus@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

I still say 'Red Dragon' was worse than 'Manhunter'.

[–] PhillipJCoulson@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

I did not care for the ready player one movie. I’m reading the book now and I think I actually dislike it more than the movie.

[–] Larry_The_Red@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

ready player one. I mean, they're both terrible, but the movie wasted less time.

[–] _NotARealMustache_@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

It's not a movie. But the MiniSeries Station Eleven on Max is superior to that book. The book is good, though! The series makes some changes that give the story so much more emotional weight, and it ties alot of threads together in a way that is more forward and coherent. Good book, better show.

[–] buc-eesbeaver@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

No answer to the question but in my experience I find if you see the movie before reading the book, the movie will 99% of the time be better than the book in your mind. Like for me, Ready Player One is such a fantastic book but the movie was terrible but I had a friend who watched the movie before reading the book and he LOVED the movie but thought the book was terrible.

[–] Decent-Sheepherder85@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

Forrest Gump and I am a legend, those books were so bad ….

[–] Za_Lords_Guard@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

For me, the De Vinci Code. I do not care for Dan Brown's writing, but I enjoyed the film.

[–] alzalamano@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago
[–] jameswesleyisrad@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

The Hannibal books are so badly written oh lawd

[–] -C0rcle-@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

The Road. It insists upon itself

[–] Harriets-Human@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

Now, Voyager by Olive Higgins Prouty. The movie with Bette Davis is excellent, but probably 50% (literally) is just scenery descriptions.

[–] juno7032@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

Jaws. The wife and the affair and r* fantasy. No thank you

[–] QuinMallery--@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

The Magicians. It was a TV show but still way better than the books.

[–] No-Part8633@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

2001: A Space Odyssey. The book is fantastic but the movie is even better

[–] Pcj16@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Don’t know how bad this is, I’ve only read the first Lord of The Rings book but I kinda prefer the movie version of it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] justahopskipandajump@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

Girl interrupted. I liked the movie but couldn't get into the book

[–] CatgutStitches@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Not a movie, but the Handmaid's Tale was a decent show and a horrendous book.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] examinedliving@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

I’m sad to hear that about Children of Men. Was looking forward to reading thar

[–] mohabmetwalli@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

Fight Club. Albeit misunderstood by many, even Chuck admitted the movie is better than the book.

[–] Dreaming_Void1923@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I think Maze Runner and Beautiful Creatures movies were better than the books. I've read only the first of both series.

For The Hunger Games, I liked Catching Fire the least for books but liked it the most for movies. for the prequel, I'm expecting the movie to be better than the book. The book tho got better with each Part division.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Acceptable-Law-4244@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I personally enjoyed the film adaptation for One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest better than the book, but I think it'd be a stretch to say that the film was objectively better.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Realistic_Warthog_23@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

Lord of the Rings. (Sorry, friends. They asked the question directly.)

[–] whackadoo13@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

This is funny because I didn’t care for the movie and loved the book. But I read the book first and I do think that matters. Different strokes and all that.

[–] Mehgician@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago (5 children)

The Descent

The movie took one small concept from the book and ran with it to great effect. The book was really weird, really gross, and somehow also really boring. The movie is brilliantly scary.

[–] TheLastKirin@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Feel up to spoiling the book for me? It's my favorite horror movie, and a really good film no matter the genre. I am curious how the book is different.

[–] thesoak@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago

The world finds out hell is real and sets out to map and colonize it. It has nothing in common with the film except the title. I enjoyed it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] NoGoodIDNames@alien.top 1 points 9 months ago (14 children)

Arrival.
The book goes much more into the concepts but the presentation of the aliens is pretty lackluster. The movie is much better at conveying a sense of awe.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›