Movies that are as good as the book

[Collatis]

The Shawshank Redemption.

^
Also Jurassic Park and The Green Mile.

[Jabberwocky]

Yet another good one is The Milagro Beanfield War by John Nichols, film version directed by Bob Redford. Terrific adaptation.

[Teacrate]

Let me add The Maltese Falcon. The film is a slavishly faithful adaptation of Dashiell Hammet's novel. One chapter from the novel is missing.

[Pax Nerdvana]

The Shawshank Redemption.

^
Also Jurassic Park and The Green Mile.

I forgot about Jurassic Park. The books are really good, as are the movies.

[Corpus Magnus]

Even The Half Blood Prince? There wasn't even a battle like in the book at the very end.

Especially the Half-Blood Prince.

Ugh, no. The Harry Potter books were so much better than the movies.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

Especially the Half-Blood Prince.

Ugh, no. The Harry Potter books were so much better than the movies.

The last three were bloated af, though.

[Corpus Magnus]

Ugh, no. The Harry Potter books were so much better than the movies.

The last three were bloated af, though.

I understand what you mean, but I think J.K. Rowling's best writing was in the last three. Deathly Hallows dragged at times, but my personal favorite Harry Potter book was the Order of the Phoenix. I also wasn't impressed with the movies' rendition of the story, particularly the way they cut out things that were important later on and tried to stick them back in without any sort of explanation... like Sirius's mirror.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

The last three were bloated af, though.

I understand what you mean, but I think J.K. Rowling's best writing was in the last three. Deathly Hallows dragged at times, but my personal favorite Harry Potter book was the Order of the Phoenix. I also wasn't impressed with the movies' rendition of the story, particularly the way they cut out things that were important later on and tried to stick them back in without any sort of explanation... like Sirius's mirror.

I suspect that might be more Rowling's fault. I'm guessing she simply didn't know she was going to use the mirror until after filming on OotP had wrapped up (much of the series has a very strong whiff of "making this shit up as I go along"), so she couldn't tell anyone involved in the film until it was too late.

[Corpus Magnus]

I understand what you mean, but I think J.K. Rowling's best writing was in the last three. Deathly Hallows dragged at times, but my personal favorite Harry Potter book was the Order of the Phoenix. I also wasn't impressed with the movies' rendition of the story, particularly the way they cut out things that were important later on and tried to stick them back in without any sort of explanation... like Sirius's mirror.

I suspect that might be more Rowling's fault. I'm guessing she simply didn't know she was going to use the mirror until after filming on OotP had wrapped up (much of the series has a very strong whiff of "making this shit up as I go along"), so she couldn't tell anyone involved in the film until it was too late.

That could be.

[Jabberwocky]

Some of that is due to Hollywood

[Saint Ryvern]

Personally, I believe that To Kill A Mockingbird (1962) is just as good as the book. Perhaps not in the same way, but it is a fantastic movie that does its source material credit.

[Forsher]

Prince Caspian, I have to say.

The book was my least favorite of any of the seven, but the film was quite good.

You prefer it to The Last Battle?

Harry Potter

Even The Half Blood Prince? There wasn't even a battle like in the book at the very end.

The Movies suffer from a distinct absence of Quidditch and in general are just complete tonal misrepresentations of the books. I think a big problem with the reception to the Cursed Child is that a lot of people have forgotten just how bloody funny the books are.

The last three were bloated af, though.

I understand what you mean, but I think J.K. Rowling's best writing was in the last three. Deathly Hallows dragged at times, but my personal favorite Harry Potter book was the Order of the Phoenix. I also wasn't impressed with the movies' rendition of the story, particularly the way they cut out things that were important later on and tried to stick them back in without any sort of explanation... like Sirius's mirror.

HBP and Philosopher's Stone are clearly the best two books for quite different reasons.

The thing with the mirror is that it's an awkward thing to include because you have to buy once again into the notion that Harry just completely forgets he has that and can check to see what Sirius is up to. It's already very convenient that Sirius is feeding Buckbeak (iirc) when Harry uses floo to check. OTP also had to deal with ANGRY Harry in its adaptation, which I am glad they toned down because last time I re-read it I wasn't a fan.

To the thread... I don't think I have an answer. I guess the closest would be that I didn't feel like reading Inkheart until after I'd seen the movie, but the book's better.

[East Gondwana]

Not a movie, but the HBO series of The Handmaid's Tale is as good as the book. It deviates significantly in some ways from the book, and significantly expands on Gilead and its creation, but it's done in a way that is in line with the book and is essentially how the book would have been if those things were actually in it. Plus, Aunt Lydia was exactly how I envisaged her when I read the book.

[Corpus Magnus]

I understand what you mean, but I think J.K. Rowling's best writing was in the last three. Deathly Hallows dragged at times, but my personal favorite Harry Potter book was the Order of the Phoenix. I also wasn't impressed with the movies' rendition of the story, particularly the way they cut out things that were important later on and tried to stick them back in without any sort of explanation... like Sirius's mirror.

HBP and Philosopher's Stone are clearly the best two books for quite different reasons.

The thing with the mirror is that it's an awkward thing to include because you have to buy once again into the notion that Harry just completely forgets he has that and can check to see what Sirius is up to. It's already very convenient that Sirius is feeding Buckbeak (iirc) when Harry uses floo to check. OTP also had to deal with ANGRY Harry in its adaptation, which I am glad they toned down because last time I re-read it I wasn't a fan.

Even so, the books got funnier as they went on. While yes, some of the plot points were a little unrealistic, J.K. Rowling's writing quality got much better as time went on - yes, the first book was good, but it wasn't out of the ordinary. The writing in the later books was.

[Saint Ryvern]

Not a movie, but the HBO series of The Handmaid's Tale is as good as the book. It deviates significantly in some ways from the book, and significantly expands on Gilead and its creation, but it's done in a way that is in line with the book and is essentially how the book would have been if those things were actually in it. Plus, Aunt Lydia was exactly how I envisaged her when I read the book.

I haven’t watched the show, but I do know it is on Hulu. Not HBO. If we can include shows in this discussion I would like to mention Game of Thrones and Westworld. Also, apparently HBO is adapting Watchmen into a show. It better be great.

[East Gondwana]

Not a movie, but the HBO series of The Handmaid's Tale is as good as the book. It deviates significantly in some ways from the book, and significantly expands on Gilead and its creation, but it's done in a way that is in line with the book and is essentially how the book would have been if those things were actually in it. Plus, Aunt Lydia was exactly how I envisaged her when I read the book.

I haven’t watched the show, but I do know it is on Hulu. Not HBO. If we can include shows in this discussion I would like to mention Game of Thrones and Westworld. Also, apparently HBO is adapting Watchmen into a show. It better be great.

Oh you're right it is Hulu.

I'm Australian so we don't have either of those here, it was on good old SBS (one of our public broadcasters). I must have got them confused

[Jabberwocky]

Personally, I believe that To Kill A Mockingbird (1962) is just as good as the book. Perhaps not in the same way, but it is a fantastic movie that does its source material credit.

Terrific novel, terrific film. But somehow I'm not even tempted to read the sequel.

[Saint Ryvern]

Personally, I believe that To Kill A Mockingbird (1962) is just as good as the book. Perhaps not in the same way, but it is a fantastic movie that does its source material credit.

Terrific novel, terrific film. But somehow I'm not even tempted to read the sequel.

Well, you shouldn't be since Harper Lee never wanted it to see the light of day when she was in her right mind. Her publishers manipulated her stroke-affected mind into approving its publication thanks to the weaselly activity of her new personal assistant, who had ties to the publishing company. Go Set a Watchman was essentially a first draft of her incredible debut novel, and she never intended to let anyone read it. The book is a fraud that sully the incredible characters and themes of To Kill A Mockingbird and should never be read anywhere by anyone.

[Mega Mexico]

"I'd say both American Psycho and the Silence of the Lambs, personally."

[Independency]

The Road was a great book and film, I thought the movie perfectly captured the bleak reality of the book.

The Mist was also a pretty good movie adaptation, the ending is even better than the book's in my opinion.

[Jabberwocky]

"I'd say both American Psycho and the Silence of the Lambs, personally."

Both are good adaptations

[Jabberwocky]

The Road was a great book and film, I thought the movie perfectly captured the bleak reality of the book.

The Mist was also a pretty good movie adaptation, the ending is even better than the book's in my opinion.

The Road: still haven't seen the film, but, boy, what a depressing novel!

[Saint Ryvern]

The Road was a great book and film, I thought the movie perfectly captured the bleak reality of the book.

The Mist was also a pretty good movie adaptation, the ending is even better than the book's in my opinion.

The Road: still haven't seen the film, but, boy, what a depressing novel!

Speaking of The Road, I would venture to say No Country For Old Men is better as a movie than as a book.

[Jabberwocky]

The Road: still haven't seen the film, but, boy, what a depressing novel!

Speaking of The Road, I would venture to say No Country For Old Men is better as a movie than as a book.

I liked both. I particularly liked the lengthy stretches of the film with no dialogue; let the visual carry the action and give the audience credit for being able to follow along. Excellent job. I don't think I liked the ending in either one, but it's certainly characteristic of Mc Carthy.

[Saint Ryvern]

This just popped into my head, but there are (some) film versions of Shakespeare's plays that are as good as the source material. The 2009 Royal Shakespeare Company's Hamlet, which stars David Tennant and Patrick Stewart, certainly lives up to expectations. Along the same vein, A Streetcar Named Desire (1951) is, in my mind, equal to its incredible source material.

It's interesting too because there are so many great movies inspired by the Bard's work and other plays. For example, can we consider Titanic or West Side Story as equals to Romeo and Juliet because they tell the same story in different times and with different backdrops? Personally, I think we can, since many of the plot points are comparable.