"The Book was better than the movie"

Discussion in 'Movies, Entertainment & Various Music Genres' started by Flow-Joe, Mar 20, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Flow-Joe

    Flow-Joe Annyong!

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2000
    Messages:
    4,633
    Are you guys getting sick of hearing this fucking phrase. You're talking to someone about one of your favorite movies and the first thing to come out of their mouth was "The book was better and the movie sucks cuz they didn't stay true to the book"

    Shut the Fuck Up! It's a movie, not a book. If you care that much, go and read the fucking book again. Movies are based on books...you can do things in books you can't do in movies. Therefore movies have to be different.

    Who here is with me, and who feels different?
    test
  2. Shy

    Shy a.k.a. Klear Eyed

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 1999
    Messages:
    13,455
    I hate it myself.

    Best part, these same people are always the ones that go watch the movie of a book they liked. Knowing they're just going to bash it later.
    test
  3. Quasi Quasar

    Quasi Quasar Auditory Illusionist

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Messages:
    33
    Doesn't bug me that much, but yeah - people can be ridiculously dismissive.
    test
  4. Flow-Joe

    Flow-Joe Annyong!

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2000
    Messages:
    4,633

    Or they're the one that when they find out they're making a movie based on a book...they automatically dismiss it, and it hasn't even been made yet!

    Movies are hard to make...and to try to turn a 400 page book into a 120 page screenplay is especially difficult, so it's definitely gonna be different!
    test
  5. Brahmio Leone

    Brahmio Leone C'era Una Volta...

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2006
    Messages:
    617
    i agree that the knee-jerk aversion is annoying, but...



    ... this excuse doesn't always work

    the movies don't always have to be different. in many cases, the studio execs only want them to be so they'll have more generic mainstream appeal.

    sometimes the problem with adaptations goes beyond the difficulty of condensing all the material... there is a bad habit of simple details in the book getting changed to be more box-office friendly.

    it's a "true to the art" vs. commercialism argument
    test
  6. Flow-Joe

    Flow-Joe Annyong!

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2000
    Messages:
    4,633
    Yeah...but movies have to be more mainstream appealing because they cost so much. Books don't cost anything more than what you pay the author and production and a little marketing...
    test
  7. LiveFromThe781

    LiveFromThe781 Don Of The Den

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2005
    Messages:
    8,928
    i was just thinkin this today cause i seen Da Vinci Code was playing and then i thought, damn niggas even said the same shit about Jurrasic Park. theyre probaly gonna be like Horbort Hears A Who was better as a book too...assholes.
    test
  8. Shy

    Shy a.k.a. Klear Eyed

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 1999
    Messages:
    13,455
    lol @ Horton Hears A Who better as a book.
    test
  9. Quasi Quasar

    Quasi Quasar Auditory Illusionist

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Messages:
    33
    Thanks for typing the stuff I didn't feel like typing.
    test
  10. Ignorant

    Ignorant Village Idiot

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    17,755
    Anybody ever consider that it's damn near impossible to turn a novel into a 2 hour movie and include everything? Most people's gripes tend to do with the movie leaving stuff out... well, duh... if the movie was created exactly like the book, then it would be 18 hours long.
    test
  11. Flow-Joe

    Flow-Joe Annyong!

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2000
    Messages:
    4,633
    They should make a fucking movie...with just the words on the screen and someone reading them...lol. No more complaints!
    test
  12. LiveFromThe781

    LiveFromThe781 Don Of The Den

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2005
    Messages:
    8,928
    when is the movie better than the book? or is it what its all really about is that these people are being ostentious (i just used a dictionary) just having to mention that they read the book in the first place. because we all know people who read more than others are super smart!

    actually to answer my first question, i think the Karma Sutra would be way better as a movie.
    test
  13. thaRooster

    thaRooster hahahahahhaha NO!

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Messages:
    3,955
    i feel what your saying

    but it is possible to make a movie better than a book (fight club)

    than its possible to take an amazing book and make it as good of a movie as possible (trainspotting)

    and than theres your classic good book but the movie really did blow (davinci code), and most stephen king novels
    test
  14. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    You sound like howard stern.

    point out to people how watching explosions and gun fights are cooler than pages. lol

    Not all books are better than movies and not all movies are better than books.

    Agree davinci code sucked balls as a movie, but as a book it was an intense masonic conspiracy/thriller.
    test
  15. Ignorant

    Ignorant Village Idiot

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Messages:
    17,755
    I think it also has something to do with the imagination... the images that we create in our head while reading a book can create expectations that are often unreconciled when watching a cinematic adaptation.

    I think those people could add some perspective if they were to not view the movie as a literal transcription, but a suggestion or another interpretation. Hell, even people who read the same book come away with different ideas.
    test
  16. Quasi Quasar

    Quasi Quasar Auditory Illusionist

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Messages:
    33
    Sometimes a person's interpretation becomes so sacred that other perspectives feel like violations. That's the beauty of art, and the horror of religion.

    It's not limited to the book/movie argument, because I felt this way while watching the Doors movie. I've read that people were actually cheering Jim Morrison's death at the end because Stone decided to depict him as a pretentious, antagonistic prima donna. And although that obviously wasn't the complete Jim Morrison, it WAS a part of him, and people that were close to him confirm that. My problem with this is the moviegoers that will take Stone's interpretation as gospel rather than viewing it for what it is and coming to their own conclusions.
    test
  17. Nam Dekan

    Nam Dekan i got a tip in my pocket

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 1998
    Messages:
    60,983
    or people that say "the tv show was better then movie"
    test
  18. thaRooster

    thaRooster hahahahahhaha NO!

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Messages:
    3,955

    thats a good example. the jim morrison bio (noone gets out of here alive i think its called )was an awesome book, and the oliver stone doors movie although not even close to 100% accuarate was quite good too but different and skewed at the same time
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)