Movies that don't live up to the book

[Magicalmrmistofeles]

Everyone thinks I'm weird, I don't do movies. The books are so much better...

I'm trying to watch Gone Girl now but god it's shit, the book wasn't great and now I'm bored.

Yy to jack reacher. Tom cruise ruined it.

Same with casual vacancy by jk Rowling. Thought the book was brilliant, really looked forward to the TV series but it was rubbish. Really cheapened it.

On the flip side, 127 hours was better as s film. I bought the book after watching the film, halfway through book I realised I'd bought it previously and given up as it was so boring. So now I have two copies

The Dark Is Rising. Saw it in a charity shop and had heard the reviews were not great but thought I'd give it a go. Would send it back to the charity shop but don't want to inflict it on anyone else. Dreadful, dreadful adaptation. They tried to turn the Stantons into the Weasleys.

The Harry Potter films. Total shite. I love the books.

I think Lord of the Rings is the only one I can think of where the films are better than the books.

I think the only films I've enjoyed more than the book were The Lord of the Rings, purely because they cut out alot of the waffly crap.

The Hobbit films OTOH seemed to add alot of waffly crap... . I would always try to read the book before I watched the film adaptation I think.

Reading The Godfather helps you understand who all the characters are in the scenes that cut between Michael at the Christening. Especially the police officer. I'd have never realised he was Al Neri in Part 2 and what his significance was.

Though I admit it was a wise idea for Coppola to ditch the sub-plot about Lucy Mancini's cavernous vagina.

Almost all. Easier to name exceptions.
The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe wasn't bad. There was a Secret Garden which was fairly okay, and (TV) The Box of Delight was very good.
I think Bedknobs and Broomsticks and Mary Poppins are both better as films.

However to name and shame, I didn't get past reading the blurb for the films n Dark s Rising or the monstrosity which they did from The Little White Horse. I think the writers should be publically flogged . To take an excellent book and basically change it so much should be at least illegal. Because it stops anyone else trying to do a good version too

Eat prat love. Amazing book. But OMG Julia Roberts was a prat in film. I looked forward to that film for months

My sisters keeper. Why do they need to change it so much ffs.

The duff. Not the most intelligent of read but I enjoyed it. The film was shite.

My friend hates going to watch films that I've read the book as I will usually find something to moan about. If a film is coming out that is based on a book I offer read the book first as it ruins it if you do it the other way round. Like game of thrones I'm reading the books now but just picture the characters as I see them in the show not in my imagination.

I've just found out they are making girl on the train. It's going to be crap I know it. sigh

The Shell Seekers - they ended with Penelope sitting with a beatific smile on her face at a family party and reunited with her wartime lover! Totally the opposite of the book story-line!

Papillon,
The Help
Fried Green Tomatoes at the Whistle Stop Cafe

Agree re The Shell Seekers

P.S. I Love You - loved the book, hated the film.

Chocolate - whoever adapted the book didn't understand it. the while point was chocolate shop opened in lent and priest opposed to it. In the film in was a mayor?

Good adaptations though

Goodnight Mister Tom with John thaw

The Time Traveller's Wife. Such a disappointment.

A Girl of the Limberlost, read the book when I was around fourteen and loved it.

Memoirs of a geisha - the film missed out huge chunks of the story. I left the cinema thinking wtf?!

It's obviously not a very direct translation, but I think Clueless is a fantastic version of Emma.

Despite moving it to the U.S., I really liked High Fidelity. I thought they really captured the spirit of both the character of Rob and of the whole book (although always thought Laura was woefully miscast).

lord of the rings am i the only person who noticed they cut out tons of stuff from the book and replaced it with moody scenes of a broken sword and a bloke? why did frodo decide to travel with strider? in the book it was because of gandalfs letter in the film? fuck knows! i was so irritated im glad i didnt go to the cinema to see it

stephen king books are excellent imo the films not so much although i loved the green mile i did approach it with extreme caution

harry potter films WTF ? were they thinking

my dd wants me to include percy jackson the books are way better than the films probably why they are not making anymore

the da vinci code i like the book i turned off the film

Miss Smilla's Feeling For Snow. Fantastic book, completely shit film.

I think a film can only ever be an interpretation of a book and perhaps it is expecting too much to enjoy a film as much as a book.
(assuming that you have a preference for reading over watching films)

I was especially disappointed with Time travelers wife.
One of my all time fave books is Hitchhikers guide, I watched the film a good few years ago, I think I enjoyed it but it seemed quite unlike the book

Definite YY to Memoirs of a Geisha. That fim was execrable, as was the film 'version' of Casini Royale... But then it's probably best not to get started on the whole Bond fim/book issue...

Agree with most of these, but the film version of Atonement was actually better than the novel IMO

The Princess Bride

Film better than book

Oh and the English Patient film lived up to the book - both brilliant