Book v Movie + plug

[Chicklet]

Three things come to mind:

The princess bride

Hannibal (I thought the book blew. The movie wasn't great, but it was better than the book.)

And Clockwork Orange...which wasn't on your list, Perd...weird. The book was good but it seemed redundant sometimes, making me feel like I was an idiot who had to have things spelled out for me.

 

[sanchopanza]

I think your beef with A Clockwork Orange may spring from a dislike/hatred of Anthony Burgess - he is a real arsehole in real-life, well he is dead now so well good things do happen. But anyway I read the book - pretty much nonsense and talks down to you - remember the ending? "Oh yes my brothers, I was growing up." which is basically the ending of Catcher in the Rye except Mr. Burgess felt obliged to spell it out for us

 

[Guest]

... I spoke to a friend lately who revealed he had tried reading the book but couldn't stand it, uncultured swine.

Sanch, I am voting you the most sardonic person on the AH. I like that; you always make me laugh at a different level than anyone else here (w/the exception of Gauche who is gauche vs. sardonic).

I absolutely adored "Sexy Beast", best thing Kingsley's ever done, and one of the greatest love stories ever put to film. Don't think I'll read the book.

"Brideshead" was a gem, have the DVDs and watch the thing every couple years. Way better than the book, Waugh generally bores me. The book bored me, but somehow the director and script person wrought gold out of it.

Perdita

 

[sanchopanza]

Possibly what happened when I read the book is that I enjoyed it simply because of the wonderful adaptation I had seen. Its not just the performances in Brideshead that make it so delightful but its also Jeremy Irons voice - when reading Brideshead I just imagined him narrating it, making it sound absolutely wonderful. Also I just thought the cast were quite adorable - Jeremy Irons and Anthony Andrews are a few of the only men I can safely say I think are handsome without intimating homoerotic thoughts . . . I've said too much I think, I'm straight by the way.

 

[Guest]

I've said too much I think, I'm straight by the way.

Hahaha, now you're all too human for me.

Irons' narration was as much a character as his on-screen presence. Wasn't Claire Bloom the most evil of good mums? And Sebastian's German lover, Kurt I think; I wanted to kick him about but understood why Seb. took him in. And the good sis and bro, Cordelia and Bridey!

Crap, you're the first person that's ever known this 'film'; let's go for coffee.

"Anon, anon..." said the drawer to Hal,

Perdita

 

[Seattle Zack]

The Nerd Contingent

I think it would be remiss not to give Lord of the Rings at least an honorable mention. As someone who spent many of his teenage years rolling dodecahedrons and plotting adventures on graph paper, I'm a huge fan of the Tolkein trilogy. Granted, the movie doesn't encompass all the themes of the books (uh oh ... envisioning a major hijack here) but the casting, locations, cinematography, effects, and overall feel of the films left this D&D geek pretty damn satisfied.

--Zack

 

[raphy]

Re: The Nerd Contingent

I think it would be remiss not to give Lord of the Rings at least an honorable mention. As someone who spent many of his teenage years rolling dodecahedrons and plotting adventures on graph paper, I'm a huge fan of the Tolkein trilogy. Granted, the movie doesn't encompass all the themes of the books (uh oh ... envisioning a major hijack here) but the casting, locations, cinematography, effects, and overall feel of the films left this D&D geek pretty damn satisfied.

--Zack

You're right Zack, it would be remiss - And I'm glad you corrected the omission. I'm very impressed by the trilogy so far, and they seem to be getting better.

Just want to throw a line in here as well about the Jack Ryan trilogy of movies. I know Clancy is not well-liked around here, but I enjoyed The Hunt For Red October, Patriot Games and Clear and Present Danger as books.

As movies, I found very few faults, other than I wish they'd signed up Harrison Ford as Ryan for Patriot Games to start with. He makes a much more believable CIA agent than Baldwin, and you need someone with Ford's charisma to offset Connery's huge screen presence.

Come to think of it, they might be up in that list of movies-better-than-books, although that's less a reflection on the quality of Clancy's books, and more to how well Harrison Ford/James Earl Jones/Anne Archer et all work together on screen.

And, of course, it was the first time I'd seen Sean Bean on the big screen, which was good =)

 

[sanchopanza]

Anything narrated by Irons is good enough for me. I started to read the novel "Waterland" lately and thought it was pretentious bullshit, but then I saw the film adaptation of it - made it all too bearable by Jeremy Irons' narration. I think he has one of my favourite voices along with James Mason and Seamus Heaney (he did a great reading of Beowulf).

 

[raphy]

Jeremy Irons is the only reason to watch Disney's The Lion King... But damn, what a good reason he is.

 

[Guest]

Irons, Mason and A. Rickman: aural nirvana for me.

Perdita

 

[Seattle Zack]

Re: Re: The Nerd Contingent

Just want to throw a line in here as well about the Jack Ryan trilogy of movies. I know Clancy is not well-liked around here, but I enjoyed The Hunt For Red October, Patriot Games and Clear and Present Danger as books.

As movies, I found very few faults, other than I wish they'd signed up Harrison Ford as Ryan for Patriot Games to start with. He makes a much more believable CIA agent than Baldwin, and you need someone with Ford's charisma to offset Connery's huge screen presence.

Raph, I liked Clancy's early stuff as well, and thought these movies were quite good (with the exception of Alec Baldwin -- what a poor casting decision that was). The recent movie with Afflack as Jack Ryan was horrible, though.

Spy movies are a particular favorite of mine, and a couple of John LeCarre's books have translated well into movies. The Spy Who Came in from the Cold had a great performance by Richard Burton, and The Tailor of Panama with Pierce Brosnan was a very thought-provoking, well written thriller.

 

[raphy]

Re: Re: Re: The Nerd Contingent

Raph, I liked Clancy's early stuff as well, and thought these movies were quite good (with the exception of Alec Baldwin -- what a poor casting decision that was). The recent movie with Afflack as Jack Ryan was horrible, though.

Spy movies are a particular favorite of mine, and a couple of John LeCarre's books have translated well into movies. The Spy Who Came in from the Cold had a great performance by Richard Burton, and The Tailor of Panama with Pierce Brosnan was a very thought-provoking, well written thriller.

Oh god, they made a Jack Ryan movie with Affleck? I am *so* glad I didn't hear about that.

Jack Ryan is a intelligent older guy who has his fair share of combat experience.

Harrison Ford is a intelligent older guy who used to be an action movie hero.

I always figured he was made for the role. Affleck is .. well .. Just wrong.

Spy movies though, yes. Has anyone seen the movie Where Eagles Dare, with Richard Burton and Clint Eastwood? I'm a huge, huge, Alastair MacLean fan (He's in my top 3 adventure authors) and I loved the book, and the whole triple-agent thing. Did the movie live up to expectations?

Raph, who wasn't very impressed by Death Train, although that may have been more due to Brosnan's terrible southern US accent.

 

[Seattle Zack]

I grew up reading Alistair MacLean, one of my all time favorites. The Guns of Navarone with Gregory Peck was a top-notch war movie. The rock climbing sequence is still one of my favorite scenes.

The sequel, Force 10 from Navarone, starred a young Harrison Ford, although the movie was disappointing.

Ice Station Zebra also comes to mind -- MacLean co-wrote many of the scripts for his movies, which is why they are all close, almost literal translations of his books.

 

[raphy]

MacLean co-wrote many of the scripts for his movies, which is why they are all close, almost literal translations of his books.

And that is never a bad thing..

Oooh, I just found out on imdb (I love that site) that they made a movie of Fear Is The Key, with a very young Ben Kingsley as Royale... Now that I would *love* to see.. It ranks right up there with Partisans as one of my favourite MacLeans ever.

 

[sanchopanza]

I think that would be interesting to see just for Ben Kingsley. I can't look at him the same way after seeing Sexy Beast now.

 

[hiddenself]

Raphy, I'm with Chicklet on the Princess Bride -- I thought the movie was vastly superior. I read the book recently and hated it. That is not a book. It's a script synopsis.

Seattle Zack, I think the Lord of the Rings movies are poor: the first one was decent, the second one pretty bad. I've read the books, and also The Hobit, The Silmarillion, the Lost Tales, the Unfinished Tales... a lot of stuff by the Master. Tolkien is about myth and human character -- not battles and swords and such. The films rely too much on the epic element. Very disappointing. I'm not going to see the third one.

 

[Chicklet]

I just wanted to bring up that I was drawn to Roald Dahl by the *movie* "The Witches" - it's not as good as the book, but it is wonderful. I just bought it a couple days ago and was blown away by it again = )

Also the movie "The secret of nimh" is better than the book, imho. I liked the book; I like the movie more.

It seems like a lot of childrens books were made into really good movies. hmm = )

Chicklet

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I just wanted to bring up that I was drawn to Roald Dahl by the *movie* "The Witches" - it's not as good as the book, but it is wonderful. I just bought it a couple days ago and was blown away by it again = )

Also the movie "The secret of nimh" is better than the book, imho. I liked the book; I like the movie more.

It seems like a lot of childrens books were made into really good movies. hmm = )

Chicklet

I loved Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of Nimh. Hated the cartoon because it really went out of its way to make it a children's story with magic and mysticism. Kind of like adding Jar Jar Binks to a Star Wars movie to appeal to the kiddies. *shudders* The book was great and while geared to children it also spoke to young adult and even adult readers. For a fantasy it was very carefully concieved to allow you to suspend your disbelief, it could have happened. The cartoon simply said fuck it, it's a kids book so lets play with it some and appeal to the kids. Can you tell I hate commercialism?

-Colly

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Raphy, I'm with Chicklet on the Princess Bride -- I thought the movie was vastly superior. I read the book recently and hated it. That is not a book. It's a script synopsis.

Seattle Zack, I think the Lord of the Rings movies are poor: the first one was decent, the second one pretty bad. I've read the books, and also The Hobit, The Silmarillion, the Lost Tales, the Unfinished Tales... a lot of stuff by the Master. Tolkien is about myth and human character -- not battles and swords and such. The films rely too much on the epic element. Very disappointing. I'm not going to see the third one.

I refuse to watch the LOTR movies. Like HS I have read the silmarillion, unfinished tales, the lays of beriland and anything else I could get my hands on when I was younger. There is no way any movie can capture even a tiny bit of the pictures those books paint in my imgination, anything I saw on the screen would be a let down. Worse, if I ever saw it on screen my own wonderful image would be colored by ILM showing off their CG balls.

Some movies were meant to not have sequels like Highlander. Some books were just not meant to be movies and Tolkien's books are like that. At least in my opinion.

-Colly

 

[dee1124]

<scrolling madly up and down the posts ...>

I'll probably see Master & Commander, too, but I agree, Russell Crowe is too good-looking. Maturin is constanty telling Aubrey he's too fat and Russell Crowe is certainly not that.

As for The Lord of the Rings, I liked the Fellowship better than the Two Towers. I'm more than a little anxious about the Return of the King. Actually, I like the Bakshi animated version better in some ways. The animated Hobbit was okay, saved by Richard Boone's Smaug.

The Princess Bride was definitely a better movie.

I just saw In Cold Blood and read it, and it's a toss-up which is better. Both are great.

I also just saw To Kill A Mockingbird but I haven't read that yet. The movie is, well, incredible.

The Name of the Rose movie was certainly more digestible than the book and didn't make me drag out my Latin dictionary. Not that I didn't enjoy it, mind you. And speaking of more digestible, the same goes for Gregory Peck's Moby Dick. I don't really remember the Patrick Stewart one all that well.

Oh, and the movie of Dune sucked.

- Dee

 

[sanchopanza]

I think To Kill a Mockingbird the film is perhaps more enjoyable than the book. The book is very good, don't get me wrong, I just think the film is more enjoyable - all Peck's fault that.

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Just out of curisoity: have you ever seen a movie first and then gone and read the book and found the book to be better?

I'm wondering whether the good book/bad movie phenomenon might be a case of which one you encounter first. For most of us it's almost always the book.

---dr.M.

 

[sanchopanza]

I've done it the wrong way round a few times. Brideshead Revisited, Lolita, Catch-22.

 

[seduced2cheat]

My two cents

I just wanted to add my two cents to the discussion.

I think with movies since you can only deal with two senses, sight and sound, much of what is written in novels is lost in translation. I go to Stephen King's books for examples.

The Shining, which was an awesome book and has been adapted for film twice is a very disappointing film. A lot of people will disagree that the Stanley Kubrick version is great, but compared to the intensity of the novel, it cannot compare. The way King will jump from person to person and the way he uses words to convey the claustrophobic feeling of the hotel, it just can't be translated into sight and sound.

On the other hand, The Shawshank Redemption, Stand By Me and The Green Mile were all excellent movies. The reason I think they translated so well to film, however, is that they were from the first person point of view. This works well in film format because the camera is one person and if we are seeing the action through one person's eyes, it comes as close to the book as possible.

As far as reading the book second. I read Silence of the Lambs after seeing the movie and liked the movie better, so you might have a point. However, the film versions of Red Dragon have not been up to par with Thomas Harris' novel.

S2C

 

[dr_mabeuse]

Re: My two cents

IOn the other hand, The Shawshank Redemption, Stand By Me and The Green Mile were all excellent movies. The reason I think they translated so well to film, however, is that they were from the first person point of view. This works well in film format because the camera is one person and if we are seeing the action through one person's eyes, it comes as close to the book as possible.

That's a really interesting observation and one I hadn't thought of before. Just off the top of my head, I think you may be right. Most of the good book/bad movie combo's that come easily to mind are all from third person POV books.

So it looks bad for "Master and Commander".

---dr.M.