~Opinions~ discussion

17 views
Fun > Book vs. Script

Comments Showing 1-50 of 94 (94 new)    post a comment »
« previous 1

message 1: by Nate (new)

Nate Many books are turned into movies. Personally I feel - more often than not - that the book is better than the script. In fact I can't recall a movie that I wuold say is better than the book.

On this thread feel free to discuss the differences between books and their screen adapations.


message 2: by Emma (new)

Emma (zeeberg) Harry Potter 5 book Vs. Harry Potter 5 movie.

The movie was horrible compared to the book! I mean, how much can you leave out? It was the shortest movie and the longest book.


message 3: by Nate (new)

Nate To be honest its been sooo long since I've read the Potter series that they all kind of run together for me. I'd have to re-read and re-watch the films. To really make a valid comment on the 5th one specififally.


But I will say this for the movies though. As far as book to movies go I think the Harry Potter sereies is one of the better ones. I mean I think they did pretty good with trying to stay true to the books.

& lets face it you are never gona be able to capture everything from the books into a movie. But I think they did pretty good over all.


message 4: by Amina (new)

Amina  (journalistam) Nate wrote: "Many books are turned into movies. Personally I feel - more often than not - that the book is better than the script. In fact I can't recall a movie that I wuold say is better than the book.

On..."


I agree. here isn't a movie I've watched which is better than it's books. That is, leaving out Roald Dhal's books. The movie's are awesome. I donno which is better there: the book or movie...


message 5: by Emma (new)

Emma (zeeberg) @Nate: I think that some of the HP movies are alright, when taking into consideration that they're movies, and one should therefore be careful with how high once expectations are. The 7th was good, I thought, They got most of the important stuff in it, and really managed to capture the feel of HP and the Deathly Hallows. Of course it's nothing compared to the book, but as far as "movies on books" go, I think HP 7 part 1 is alright.


message 6: by Naomi (new)

Naomi  (purplebookdragon) | 202 comments the only movie that i can think of that was as good as the book was the princess bride. it was almost exactly the same.


message 7: by Jerry (new)

Jerry | 850 comments what about lord of the rings? the books were really boring, but the movies weren't.


message 8: by Annemarie (new)

Annemarie Carlson (annielawlz) | 470 comments I think one of my favorite book turned into movies is A Princess Bride. It's sooo similar. They're both hilarious and amazing.


message 9: by Jerry (new)

Jerry | 850 comments never read/seen that


message 10: by Nate (new)

Nate If you watch Lord of the Rings backwards its about a midget who gets a ring from a volcano & spends the rest of the time walking home. LOL JK

The movies were very good. I had trouble getting through the books.


message 11: by Annemarie (new)

Annemarie Carlson (annielawlz) | 470 comments Yeahh. I feel like to be a proper nerd I should be able to get through LOTR no problem, but honestly I haven't got past halfway through the second book.

The movies are so beast.


message 12: by Annemarie (new)

Annemarie Carlson (annielawlz) | 470 comments Donatello wrote: "never read/seen that"

You never seen Princess Bride?!

See it now!


message 13: by Jerry (new)

Jerry | 850 comments about lotr: the books were really boring, too much walking, not enough action. but in the movies, there were lots of battle scenes. i LOVED when denethor jumped off the cliff, screaming and flaming!!! i don't think they did a good job with the ents, though...bad special effects.
about princess bride: it sounds all girly.


message 14: by Annemarie (new)

Annemarie Carlson (annielawlz) | 470 comments Ahah. It's not. At alll. That's kind of the whole point of it.

"A classic fairy tale, with swordplay, giants, an evil prince, a beautiful princess, and yes, some kissing (as read by a kindly grandfather)."


message 15: by Jerry (last edited Jan 21, 2011 05:49PM) (new)

Jerry | 850 comments hmm...have you ever watched stardust? great movie, even though there's romance. it sounds like princess bride, with lots of humor. i keep meaning to read the book...


message 16: by Annemarie (new)

Annemarie Carlson (annielawlz) | 470 comments Stardusttt!
I LOVE Stardust.


message 17: by Jerry (new)

Jerry | 850 comments have you read the book, seen the movie, or both?


message 18: by Annemarie (new)

Annemarie Carlson (annielawlz) | 470 comments I haven't had a chance to read the book. I do love me some Gaiman though (Coraline/American Gods). I've just seen the movie.


message 19: by Jerry (new)

Jerry | 850 comments same here. i've also seen the coraline movie, and loved it.


message 20: by Annemarie (new)

Annemarie Carlson (annielawlz) | 470 comments Coraline was soooo good. I liked the movie better than the book, actually.


message 21: by Jerry (new)

Jerry | 850 comments they did a great job with the animations and stuff.
have you ever read/seen Animal Farm? i read the book and saw the animated and the unanimated movies.


message 22: by Annemarie (new)

Annemarie Carlson (annielawlz) | 470 comments I read Animal Farm a whilee ago. I remember not liking it very much. It was for school and we over analyzed to the point that I wanted to shoot the book in the face.

I haven't seen the movies.


message 23: by Jerry (new)

Jerry | 850 comments yeah, we did that too, lol.
in the animated movie, jones walks into the windmill, lights some dynamite, then sits drinking beer while it explodes with him inside. lol! at the end, benjamin leads a revolt against napoleon. benjamin is my favorite character!!

in the unanimated movie, the ending was more realistic, and napoleon's dictatorship just collapsed on its own. old major was an automaton, i think it's called, and he looked so comical!!!!!


message 24: by Annemarie (new)

Annemarie Carlson (annielawlz) | 470 comments Hahaha, I'll probably watch them at some point. :)


message 25: by Jerry (new)

Jerry | 850 comments yeah, the animated one was pretty comical...


message 26: by Emma (new)

Emma (zeeberg) Oh god. You don't like Lord of the Rings (books)!? My dad read them to me when I was little, and I loved them even then. Yeah, someone should've told Tolkien that he doesn't need to use 3 book-pages to descibe a hill-top, but the books were still Legendary. They're practically the parent of every fantasy book *sigh* I love those books. Must read them again soon.


message 27: by Naomi (new)

Naomi  (purplebookdragon) | 202 comments lord of the rings is one of my favorite movies of all time!!!! the books were awesome too, but i think i liked the movies better because they were faster paced.... but lotr's is amazing!!!!


message 28: by Amina (new)

Amina  (journalistam) I need to read lotr. I have it right on the top of my to-read. Once I get to London, it's gonna be the first thing I read.


message 29: by Amina (new)

Amina  (journalistam) ikr! The movies mostly suck, since they leave out vital parts


message 30: by Jerry (new)

Jerry | 850 comments Emma (Audere est facere) wrote: "Oh god. You don't like Lord of the Rings (books)!? My dad read them to me when I was little, and I loved them even then. Yeah, someone should've told Tolkien that he doesn't need to use 3 book-page..."

just because a book is legendary doesn't make it good.
harry potter is pretty much exactly the same, i couldn't believe it!


message 31: by Emma (new)

Emma (zeeberg) Did you not read the part where I said I loved the books, even when I was nine years old? The books are legendary, but they're also amazingly well-written, and I've always been able to appreciate that. Harry Potter is beyong words. I love those books too.


message 32: by Jerry (new)

Jerry | 850 comments but i didn't love the books, far from it.
harry potter was okay. the firekeeper novels are the best!!


message 33: by Emma (new)

Emma (zeeberg) But I did. I appreciate how well they're written and thought out, and I have great respect for Tolkien, not to mention that I admire his work. He knew what he was doing, even if some of the descriptions where long. It was another time. The books where for different, more formal, people - those who lived in that time.


message 34: by Jerry (new)

Jerry | 850 comments i know. but it was annoying how every sentence was a whole paragraph. i kept having to go back to see what the beginning of the sentence was about!
in my opinion, the movies were much better, even though at times the special effects were pretty bad.


message 35: by Emma (new)

Emma (zeeberg) Yes, I agree that some of the paragraphs where longer than need be, but I think the over-all story and the way it was e´written more than made up for that. In comparsion to the books, the movies wheren't all that good. ButI do think that they did an amazing job nevertheless. In my opinion, LOTR movies where really well made. I remember when the first movie came out. I think I was... 10? 11? I'm not sure. Not very old. In movie-world the years since LOTR is a lot. So much has happened to technology, so many inventions has made special effects and animation easier and more realistic. But at the time, and actually for a couple of years, they where the best made movie I'd ever seen. I still think they're some of the best movies I've seen, mostly because they're so througough.


message 36: by Jerry (new)

Jerry | 850 comments yeah, they had a real job separating all the unnecessary stuff!
i still haven't watched the first movie or the beginning of the second though... i love how gollum was always arguing with himself!


message 37: by Jerry (new)

Jerry | 850 comments lord of the rings is proof that that's not true.


message 38: by Emma (new)

Emma (zeeberg) Not at all. Lord of the Rings is one of the best books of all times. It's the foundation for just about every fantasy book/world created since.

It's every individuals opinion, when it comes to this sort of thing. You might not have appreciated the amazing writing in Lord of the Rings, but instead appreciated the beautiful and well-made effects and scenes in the movies.


message 39: by Jerry (new)

Jerry | 850 comments i only enjoy books with enough action to keep me interested.


message 40: by Emma (new)

Emma (zeeberg) And I enjoy books that are well-written and well thought-out, not to mention books with a sensible plot. For me, action isn't enough. There must be some actual depth to the book.


message 41: by Jerry (new)

Jerry | 850 comments i like that too. but there wasn't much depth to LOTR. unless, of course, i was too bored by the repetition to concentrate on finding a hidden meaning.


message 42: by Emma (new)

Emma (zeeberg) There was plenty of depth. It was one of the most amazing and well-though trough, not to mention well-written, stories of all times. It had everything from action, to love, to mystery. Sure, it had some descriptions that could've been shortened down, but the overall story was worth it. I've rarely read a series as well-written as Lord of the Rings.


message 43: by Jerry (new)

Jerry | 850 comments read the firekeeper novels. action, romance, depth, everything you could hope for in books.


message 44: by Emma (new)

Emma (zeeberg) I doubt they'll top Lord of the Rings. Also, I've had it with any wolf and vampire related stories. It's getting old.


message 45: by Jerry (last edited Feb 05, 2011 04:46PM) (new)

Jerry | 850 comments oh, they do, easily.
and there are no vampires. i was sick of that the moment twilight came out of theaters. i don't like those stupid, mushy vampire/werewolf books either. you should try the books before assuming they are like twilight, which they are not! never judge a book by its cover.


message 46: by Emma (new)

Emma (zeeberg) I don't naturally assume that a book is like twilight. I have read plenty of really good vampire and 'wolf books. I know there are no vampires in the firekeeper novels, as I have looked into them. And no, they don't seem like something I'd care for very much.

And as for them being better than lord of the rings: That's your personal opinion. As it is though, Lord of the Rings is just about world-wide, whereas the firekeeper novels are only known by some.


message 47: by Naomi (new)

Naomi  (purplebookdragon) | 202 comments i have to agree with emma, it would be really hard to find any book that would top lord of the rings.


message 48: by Emma (new)

Emma (zeeberg) Ah, a fellow fan I see :) What was your favorite part Zoe?


message 49: by Naomi (new)

Naomi  (purplebookdragon) | 202 comments um.... i dont know. in the book i dont think i have a favorite part, in the movie i loved the battles, both at helms deep and the one by minis tirith (sorry if its spelled wrong), cuz i love all the action and stuff there. i also really like gollum, just because he is so evil.


message 50: by Jerry (new)

Jerry | 850 comments just because no one's heard of the firekeeper novels doesn't make them worse than LOTR.


« previous 1
back to top