films via the books

[tylersmum]

thought i would start this thread after some of the comment on bridget jones.

i prefer books to films and i have read many but only get to see the film if someone else wants to watch it as i feel they never live upto the book.

for example 'babe' i read the book along time ago maybe 5 or 6 years before the film it was called 'the sheepdog' then but i loved it. ds loves the film but i just thought it rubbish.

The worst film i saw after reading the book was 'interview with a vampire' i thought the book was brilliant and the film missed loads out and the visual was pants.

anyway hope to hear you views you never know i might get a few good ideas of books to read.

I thought the film of 'Girl with a pearl earring' was stunning, did full justice to both the book and the paintings.
I've never read Lord of the Rings but adore the films, and most LotR afficionados seem to think they're as good as they could be.

imo it's not really fair to make a direct comparison between a book and its film adaptation in that it is impossible to capture a book in the space of a 2 hour movie. There have been some good adaptations though - I enjoyed Persuasion (the one with Ciaran Hinds and Amanda Root) every bit as much as the book. I also thought the most recent Harry Potter was pretty good. And I liked Kiss of the Spider Woman with William Hurt. Also most people seem to agree that the LOTR films have done a good job of capturing the spirit of the books.

just trying to establish if there are any out there that you thought were good thats all or really bad. i know that films will never add up to the great way that books can convey storys but some films are really bad

Tylersmum - not sheepdog but Sheep-pig!

I thought Sense and Sensibility with Emma Thompson et al was a good adaptation of the novel.

Schindlers List was good

Always prefer to read book before seeing the film. Can't think of any recommendations at the moment but did think the Captain correlli's Mandolin was a brilliant book and a dreadful screen adaptation.

i loved the book of I Capture the Castle and went to see the film expecting very little. there were a few hiccups, but overall i thought it was brilliantly done, not least because it's the sort of book you can only have a very emotional response to. it was made in the same spirit somehow. captured the sense of being a teenage girl really well.

agree about persuasion. completely true to the spirit of the book.

Angelas Ashes is one of my all time favourites and its one i have read and re read over and over so i know it word for word almost. The film version while good did not capture the book at all for me. I was happy to see it because it was another version of the book, but in no way compared.
I always think that though about films vs books.
I think that you can lose yourself totally in a wonderful book because its just you and the story and characters but in a movie there is more/less going on and it is impossible to interpret the pictures in your head as we all see a story differently.

Am a big John Grisham fan and really think only 1 or perhaps 2 have done his books justice. A time to kill film was good, and the firm was okay. Saw 'Runaway Jury' on the weekend and was very disappointed when compared to the book.

Thought Pelican Brief was a good film on its own but when compared with the book felt it dropped bits in that unless you had read the book would you would not have understood.

I'm obsessive about reading books before seeing the film, otherwise I spend all my time picturing it how it was in the film.

Usually though, the film isn't a patch on the books because you just can't fit it all in. LOTR was the exception purely because they are so long, and there is more time to fit it all in, but even they missed out huge chunks (Poor Ol Tom Bombadil didn't even get a look in).

Harry Potter films I love, but only if I watch them as films in their own rights, I find myself ranting about what was missed out if I think about the books . I thought it was quite telling that my friend had seen all 3 films, but not read any books, and she thought they were just standalone stories, not in a set order.

Shawshank Redemption is very good as an adaptation - it is different to the book, but both the book and the film have enough qualities for it to work.

Interview with the Vampire was rubbish I agree, chiefly because it had Looney Tunes Tom in it. So different from Rice's description of Le Stat.

I think Oprah tried really hard with the film version of Beloved by Toni Morrison, but the book was hinged on the language and the traditionof magical realism which never translates well on to screen.

I must get round to Girl with a Pearl Earring as I enjoyed the book, and all Tracey Chevalier's books - Falling Angels and the Virgin Blue are wonderful - but I can't bear Colin Firth. Hey Ho.