Task 18: Read a Book That Was Adapted Into a Movie. Then Watch The Movie. Debate Which Is Better.

[Doc.]

Snowynight wrote: "I read the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and then the 2005 movie, and I'm really disappointed by the film. Arthur is made into much more a typical Nice Guy tm who can't take no as an answer and ..."

I didn't like the movie, either. I was surprised to find that Adams wrote the script.

[Snowynight]

S. wrote: "I didn't like the movie, either. I was surprised to find that Adams wrote the script. "

I find it really surprising (and disappointing) too. In general, I find movie adaptation of books often lackluster (for example, the movie adaptation for Perfume: The Story of a Murderer relies so much on characters holding the idiot ball it's embarrassing to watch) but I thought I should give them another chance. Probably not again soon.

[Doc.]

I think they're both very different art forms. It's probably difficult to switch from books to screenwriting. Probably only John Irving and Ray Bradbury have earned recognition for doing both well. Nothing ever beats reading the book anyway, 'cause internal monologues aren't easily translated to the screen. And that's half the fun of getting to know a character!

[Snowynight]

S. wrote: "I think they're both very different art forms. It's probably difficult to switch from books to screenwriting. Probably only John Irving and Ray Bradbury have earned recognition for doing both well...."

I agree.

[Paulette]

I read the YA book Me and Earl and the Dying Girl by Jesse Andrews. This very rare, but I enjoyed the movie more. I wonder if it was easier for me to identify with the characters because of the very fine performances of the actors. Altogether I would recommend both formats that tells a great human story.

[Evyjo]

I read 84, Charing Cross Road and feel in love with the story. (I'm currently reading which is the second part of Helene Hanff's journey/story)
After reading "84" I became quite obsessed and went searching to buy myself a copy for my home library (thanks to abebooks I now have my own copy), in the process I found out it was adapted into a movie! Got the movie in a hot second at my library and have to admit it was beautifully done. Now I'll have to add the movie to my shopping list as well!

[Nadine in California]

Edith wrote: "Astrid wrote: "I have a few options: Dark Places, Winter's Bone, Me Before You and The Circle (which I never finished). I would include ..."

Ah, Winter's Bone, one of my all time favorites. I think both the book and the movie are superb, but the book has the edge for me. The movie made some very small changes that normally wouldn't matter, but with a book this good, even the little things mean so much. For example, in the movie Ree wears jeans but in the book she wears old hand-me-down dresses and her legs are always bare in the frigid weather - and red and chapped. It's a privation that Ree doesn't think twice about but hits the reader hard. There are so many details like that in the book - I guess that's one way Woodrell can pack so much power into such a short book.

[Evyjo]

Mona wrote: "Evyjo wrote: "I read 84, Charing Cross Road and feel in love with the story. (I'm currently reading whi..."

No problem! The movie is only for 84 but it's very good! I was so in love with the story after I finished 84 book and movie I went on to Dutchess. Brooklyn is on my TBR list.

[Mary Sue]

I just finished The Scarlet Letter - now to find a copy of the movie.

[Mary]

I loved the book Me Before You, but I saw the movie too close to reading the book and couldn't get into the story of the movie as I kept making too many comparisons.

[Hebah]

I also went with The Martian for this one, and I have to say, the two came out about even, which is rare for me. I thought the movie did a nice job condensing what it needed to keep things moving along, while still maintaining the tone of the book. If the movie is a little less hardcore scienc-y, it makes up for that with an added sense of closure that the book didn't quite have. And the inclusion of the disco soundtrack to the movie was a fun touch :).

[Nadine in NY]

Hebah wrote: "I also went with The Martian for this one, and I have to say, the two came out about even, which is rare for me. I thought the movie did a nice job condensing what it needed to keep..."

Agreed! The Martian is that rare book / movie duo in which the book and movie are equally good, in somewhat different ways.

[Maria U.]

I read Me Before You in June (or was it may?) and yesterday I saw the film. The book was an instant favorite for me, I loved it. But seeing it come to life was even better. It was all I could hope for. I don't know if I would have liked it if I hadn't read the book, because it leaves out a lot of things and moves too quickly. But overall I cried like a baby (Which I didn't do when I read the book) and loved Emilia Clarke as Louisa Clark. She was perfect. And Sam Claflin was handsome and did a great job as Will Traynor. The new Hugh Grant perhaps!?

[Doc.]

Maria wrote: "I read Me Before You in June (or was it may?) and yesterday I saw the film. The book was an instant favorite for me, I loved it. But seeing it come to life was even better. It was all I could hope ..."

Agreed. The movie was so rushed! It lacked the narrative flow of the book, IMO. Felt like a terrible editing job, though Claflin definitely did a great job.

[Megan]

I used The Martian for this category -- I lucked out that my book club was slated to read this around the time the movie became available on cable, so I was able to read the book, watch the movie, and debate which was better with folks who were in the know :) I'd originally planned to read/watch Laura and may still do that.

[Mindy]

I read "A Secret Garden" for both this and the challenge of reading a middle grade novel. I tried watching the movie that was made in the 1990s, but didn't finish. As with the book, I got bored quickly with it and probably would have as a child. I have friends who absolutely adore this book, but for some reason it just doesn't speak to me.

[Annie]

forgot to post, but I read Perfume: The Story of a Murderer. The film....uh....well, Alan Rickman was great and the cinematography was a+. Those are the nicest things I can say about it.

I read somewhere that the author refused the rights to the film to anyone other than Milos Forman or Stanley Kubrick, but ended up selling the rights to Bernd Eichinger. And man, I am forever mad because I think Milos would have done such an amazing job.

[Rachel]

I'm reading The DUFF: Designated Ugly Fat Friend. I've actually already seen the movie, and it's causing me problems because I keep trying to compare the book to what I remember from seeing it. Normally I read the book first to avoid this, but I didn't know at the time that I saw it that I was going to read the book.

[Cat]

I read Inherent Vice for this one. I actually watched the movie first and knew right away I was going to read (and love) the book. I think it helped watching the movie first because I would have gotten hung up on the sheer number of plots, subplots, main characters, tangential characters, etc. All confused further by the fact that so much of it is left open in the end. Knowing that going into it made reading it much more enjoyable. I don't know if I can pick which was better. They both have their merits. I guess I'll say I think the film was the best adaptation I can imagine, Paul Thomas Anderson did an incredible job translating Pynchon for the big screen.

[Bonnie G.]

I agree Inherent Vice was an amazing adaptation. When I heard the were making a movie I assumed it was an impossible task and the movie would be awful, but I liked it!

[Tess]

I read The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. Had no idea it was so short and I actually liked the movie better.

[Nancy]

Cheri wrote: "I'm going to try for Brooklyn. I'll make it my first book of the year and hopefully the movie will still be in theaters when I've finished reading!"
That's what I ended up doing. I missed the movie in the theater but knew it would be coming to premium cable. I held off on getting the book until I saw the movie on the schedule. I read the book first and watched the movie about a week later. It was an excellent adaptation, faithful to the spirit of the book with understandable glossing over of certain plot elements. I'd say the book was better, but in this case both were quite good. Film adaptations are often disappointing, but not this time.

[Lori]

The Descendants

[quietprofanity]

I read Of Human Bondage by W. Somerset Maugham and watched the 1934 Leslie Howard/Bette Davis adaptation because I bought both in a set years ago. The book was hard to love, but I eventually came around to it. Meanwhile, the movie was pretty awful -- it only adapts a part of the book and that makes it difficult to connect with the already hard-to-like main characters. (I reviewed both together here.)

[Bea]

Bea wrote: "Since we have the DVD (and my husband is willing to watch a movie with me), I am going with Fight Club."

Well, I read the book quite awhile ago and found it a bit bizarre. But...we just now got our DVD working and I was able to watch the movie. It was as bizarre as the book, but the visual was easier to follow. In this case, the movie was better.

[MacKenzie]

I finally got around to reading Trainspotting. Something I probably still would've put off if it hadn't been for my boss deciding he wanted to publish a version of it for our own city and times. Perfect timing, too, with the release of T2 early next year! While I (of course) prefer the book to the movie, I can't say that I disliked the movie. I think it's one of those rare times that I can distinguish one from the other, and appreciate both for what they successfully accomplished.

[Stina]

I read Pope Joan, and I liked the book better. Here's an excerpt from my book review:

I liked the movie version okay, but as with any film treatment of a novel of any complexity, there was a lot missing. If the book felt like a soap opera, the movie felt like musical theatre. Not bad, certainly, but focused more on hitting the highlights than on exploring any depths to the story. As much as I like David Wenham and Iain Glen, I'm not sure I would recommend the movie to anybody who has not already read the book.