LibriVox Forum

Films better than books
Page 3 of 3

Author:  fiddlesticks [ January 16th, 2017, 3:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Films better than books

Charles Dickens is my favorite author, and I have read almost all of his books just a few left to get to. The only one I did not like was Great Expectations. I can definitely understand why people do not like his books though. I love the details, all the quirky characters, and long descriptions. He was actually paid by the word which explains why he liked to be so wordy! I have watched quite a few movies/series based on his books and enjoyed most of them, especially Little Dorrit and Bleak House.

Movies better than books, I have never been a Jane Austen fan, her books are enjoyable, but I do not love them and Pride and Prejudice is my least favorite of all (though I have not read Persuasion) But I do really like the mini series version of P&P, much more than the book!

Author:  annise [ January 16th, 2017, 4:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Films better than books

mjfillen wrote:
Well, I... That is ... You see...
Hey! Look!
[*points over your shoulder*]
[*runs the opposite direction*]

Chicken :D

Author:  kukailimoku [ January 16th, 2017, 5:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Films better than books

The list is mighty short but a few that stick in my mind would be "Jurassic Park" (the novel plods along with too much detail on the science and little or no character development...yawn), "Charlie & the Chocolate Factory" (I already miss you, Gene), "Jaws" (the book was okay but the movie made even lakes scary), "The Jungle Book" (the cartoon one), "Madame Doubtfire" (I miss you too, Robin) and "The Wizard of Oz".

Author:  pjcsaville [ May 30th, 2017, 11:05 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Films better than books

The 100 by Kass Morgan was the most boring book I've probably ever read (besides Outlander and Watership Down) because I abandoned it about 50 pages in but the TV series rocked! Probably one of my favorite shows.

The Jungle Book wasn't that good but Disney made it better with the movie lol.

I can't think of any other. The Lord of the Rings movies were just as epic as the books. Though I WISH Tolkien had the Elves march to the aid of Helm's Deep (probably one of my favorite moments in the movies, besides Galadriel casting Sauron out of Dol Guldur but that was in the Hobbit movies lol). Tolkien SHOULD have had the Elves help out in the book lol! So EPIC!

Author:  CliveCatterall [ June 2nd, 2017, 7:50 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Films better than books

enko wrote:
Hazel Pethig wrote:
The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy

While the movie was great, nothing can come close to the book. Douglas Adams had such a unique way of thinking that no one can come imitate to his impressive talent. All 5 books of the trilogy are great, but nothing comes close to the first one.

Err.. Hazel. The thread is about movies being better than the books they were based on. Not the contrary.


[engaging nerd mode]
The original H2G2 was a radio series, which IMHO was better than the books, movies, TV series, action toys etc. I believe SF works best as audio [thanks mark nelson, phil chenevert, mark smith etc etc. etc.]

(someone usually says "audio is best because the pictures are better" at this point - and we all throw vegetables)

[disengaging nerd mode]



Author:  CliveCatterall [ June 2nd, 2017, 7:58 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Films better than books

The Inspector Morse TV series was heaps better than the Colin Dexter novels on which it was based.


Author:  realisticspeakers [ October 5th, 2017, 6:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Films better than books


Was the first ebook I've read way back when the Franklin E-reader was hot.

The made-for-tv miniseries was just visually splendid.

Author:  Eye4words [ October 8th, 2017, 11:12 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Films better than books

Only one haunting word. PSYCHO

Page 3 of 3 All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group