Neuromancer is good but The Matrix was massively better (although granted, the link betwen them is tenuous)
Touching the Void - the film is brilliant but the book's not very well written.
Also The Lovely Bones - I thought the book was a bit rubbish but the film's pretty good.
Tinker, tailor, soldier spy. Good book, excellent film.
Lord of the Rings+ 1. Boring, poorly written books, whereas the films are some of the best, if not the best, fantasy films ever made.
Margin Walker - Member
Trainspotting - is it just me but felt the book was grim/amazing. Film was like a comedy - but enjoyed it(same cant be said for American Psycho - the film was shockingly bad)
Any film where there's a book adaption/novelisation written by Alan Dean Foster.The list includes Alien, The Thing, Star Wars and Chronicles of Riddick.
Novelisations don't really count though, that's a book of a film rather than a film of a book.
If you discount the sequels and the way it all turned out, First Blood was actually an excellent film and the book was great too.
brakes - Member
Life of Brian.
although I must admit, I've never made it all the way through the New Testament.
:lol:
LA Confidential. The book is excellent, but has so many different story threads running through it that you could never do them all justice.
With the film, they trimmed exactly what they needed to to make it much tighter and more direct, but the main story arc, the tension and atmosphere are still there. Every adaptation should be done so well.
Battle Royale! Although, in fairness, the novel may be so shite because of the translation.
Touching the Void - the film is brilliant but the book's not very well written.
Also The Lovely Bones - I thought the book was a bit rubbish but the film's pretty good.
A double-whammy of nonsense. Never before in the history of Singletrackworld's beloved forum have I felt more compelled to tell someone their opinion is quite frankly wrong
Touching the Void - fab mountaineering book; one of the best I have read
The Lovely Bones - very very poor adaptation of the book. I felt like I was watching a completely unrelated story at times.
Forest Gump!
Any of the Jane Austen adaptations, film or TV.
I bought "Emma" on the back of the TV version and it became not so much a read as a challenge just to get through.
Arguably the most boring book ever written. Even more than the bible. Or the koran, probably...
[whisper]That's cos it's a lady's book[/whisper]
The koran? I doubt it...
I don't think you can compare Blade Runner to 'Do Androids Dream...' as they are vastly different in terms of theme, characters (same names but Deckard is completely different, for example), but overall I prefer the book to the film.
All of the Bourne films. The book is so heavy going, Ive started it three times and barely made a dent.
Those who've said a film is better than the book (and specifically the LOTR coz I thought the films were merely ok) did you read the book first?
I have found it harder to appreciate a book after already seeing the film, but the other way round the book is almost always better.
You must log in to post.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
