S/O HP: Name a movie

bkeane619 · February 2014

Name a movie that was better than the book!.

bkeane619 · February 2014

I vote for LOTR because they were really long and lots of walking in the woods.

Lee81 · February 2014

I was going to say none because if I liked the book enough to watch the movie, it was probably a really good book. Sometimes a movie will do justice to a really good book, but it's not going to be better.

Then I thought about the couple of Shakespeare plays I've read. The movies were definitely better because plays are meant to be seen, not read. But then I wondered if it counts as a book when it's a play.

So I think I'm back to my first answer, which is none.

edited to remove a rogue word.

JLW0504 · February 2014

The DaVinci Code. I love Dan Brown and the Robert Langdon stories.

chelseyestelle · February 2014

Jurassic park!

bkeane619 · February 2014

chelseyestelle said:
Jurassic park!

Yea that was so spectacular when it came out.

WhenInRome11 · February 2014

Though it's not a movie, I prefer Game of Thrones the series to the books. I do love the books though.

apritchett50 · February 2014

bkeane619 said:
I vote for LOTR because they were really long and lots of walking in the woods.

Agree, My favorite movies of all time!

Wino0920 · February 2014

The Hunger Game Movies are way better than the books. I hated the books. I've seen the movies because I was curious and I love Jennifer Lawerence. They are pretty good and I am enjoying them.

JLW0504 · February 2014

brit1983 said:

Wino0920 said:
The Hunger Game Movies are way better than the books. I hated the books. I've seen the movies because I was curious and I love Jennifer Lawerence. They are pretty good and I am enjoying them.
Disagree. I loved the books - I thought they had a lot more depth and meaning to them. I feel like they dumbed down the story to make the movies.

Same here. I was do disappointed with the first movie. I still haven't seen the second one though.

sleepy33 · February 2014

The Godfather. Easily.

ballygirl · February 2014

bkeane619 said:

I vote for LOTR because they were really long and lots of walking in the woods.

YES - I could not get through the books but I loved the movies.

Wino0920 · February 2014

I totally disagree with them having more depth and meaning. I barely could make it through. They were horrible horrible horrible.

The first book was the only good one. I should've just stopped.

Lee81 · February 2014

sleepy33 said:
The Godfather. Easily.

Disagree. They added too much that wasn't even in the book to stretch it into a trilogy. I might have agreed with you if it wasn't for all the extra stuff. I loved the book but didn't care for the additions in the movies.

sfshorter · February 2014

Wino0920 said:

The Hunger Game Movies are way better than the books. I hated the books. I've seen the movies because I was curious and I love Jennifer Lawerence. They are pretty good and I am enjoying them.

Totally disagree. The movies are terrible compared to the books.

taylormarie923 · February 2014

The Outsiders.

bkeane619 · February 2014

I think Catching Fire was better but not HG

sfshorter · February 2014

ballygirl said:

bkeane619 said:

I vote for LOTR because they were really long and lots of walking in the woods.

YES - I could not get through the books but I loved the movies.

This. Great movies.

bkeane619 · February 2014

Oooh I got one lol Breaking Dawn part 2. The movie was bad but the book was worse lol.

taylormarie923 · February 2014

This might be a UO, but I think To Kill a Mockingbird was better in movie form. #IwouldrunawaywithGregoryPeckifhewasmyageohandalive

bkeane619 · February 2014

quartermisses said:
Bridget Jones's Diary.

ETA: the second book was much better than the second movie, though.

Did u hear there is a new book?

taylormarie923 · February 2014

Oh! Any Jane Austen book. I cannot handle her writing.

Don't hate me @btimes3

asilwhite · February 2014

taylormarie923 said:

This might be a UO, but I think To Kill a Mockingbird was better in movie form. #IwouldrunawaywithGregoryPeckifhewasmyageohandalive

As much as I LOVE Gregory Peck, that book is my all time favorite book EVER. I deft think that's an UO

bkeane619 · February 2014

taylormarie923 said:
Oh! Any Jane Austen book. I cannot handle her writing.

Don't hate me @btimes3

No! You are wrong there is no Jane Austen movie that is better than the book.

tmccord21 · February 2014

Book always trumps movies.

nbcarlson · February 2014

The Notebook.

ETA: I missed Snowboarderbritt's post above. What she said.

taylormarie923 · February 2014

asilwhite said:

taylormarie923 said:

This might be a UO, but I think To Kill a Mockingbird was better in movie form. #IwouldrunawaywithGregoryPeckifhewasmyageohandalive

As much as I LOVE Gregory Peck, that book is my all time favorite book EVER. I deft think that's an UO

I love the book too, it is a very close race. #mypetratwasnamedscout

taylormarie923 · February 2014

No Country For Old Men. I need to watch that movie again.

nbcarlson · February 2014

baconface said:
The Help.

I love the story, but I didn't think the book was that well-written. It was a page-turner story-wise, but it read like it was the writer's first attempt at a novel. Maybe it was, I don't know.

Loved the movie, BTW.

I read it so fast I don't even remember, but I loved the book and the movie. I think the movie might win by a slight margin because I LOVE Emma Stone.

sleepy33 · February 2014

Lee81 said:

The Godfather. Easily.
Disagree. They added too much that wasn't even in the book to stretch it into a trilogy. I might have agreed with you if it wasn't for all the extra stuff. I loved the book but didn't care for the additions in the movies.

Ok, first of all, don't even talk to me about The Godfather Part 3. As far as I'm concerned, it doesn't exist. It's dead to me. It sleeps with the fishes. Second, 2 is arguably BETTER than the original movie. Like, film school nerds will argue that it's better. So it's at least *as* good as 1. Third, there was so much extraneous, weird crap in the book that *thank goodness* did not make it into the movie. All that stuff about how Sonny had huge junk so his wife didn't want to sleep with him? Wut?

ajjf1026 · February 2014

The Hunger Games. I could barely get through the books but so far I really enjoy the movies.

Inn2 · February 2014

quartermisses said:

bkeane619 said:

Bridget Jones's Diary.

ETA: the second book was much better than the second movie, though.
Did u hear there is a new book?

Yes and it sounds like nothing I want to read.

Just finished it and I am a huge fan of both the books and the first movie. Think the second movie veered off course and too many changes. That said, the new one is sad. Very little humor to me and actually makes me the most uncomfortable. Don't read it and then you can be left with the images of her and a Mark happily ever after.

Inn2 · February 2014

Stephen King's " The a Green Mile" I liked better as a movie than a book. Otherwise, I almost always prefer the book. " Shawshank Redemption" is another SK movie that might have been better than the book...and maybe "Stand By Me". Yeah, I am a huge SK fan.

shelley1002 · February 2014

A Time to Kill.
I couldn't follow the book. It jumped all over. It seemed like every paragraph was about different people in the story.

The Joy Luck Club.
Love the movie but the book had some better stories for the moms' pasts that should have been used in the movie instead of the ones (that were in the book too) that were used in the movie.

ETA: Ignore the Joy Luck Club. That belongs in the other post about the book way better than the movie.

hlb622 · February 2014

World War Z. Took me months to get through the book, but the movie was pretty good -- although, absolutely NOTHING like the book.

Lee81 · February 2014

sleepy33 said:

Lee81 said:

sleepy33 said:
The Godfather. Easily.
Disagree. They added too much that wasn't even in the book to stretch it into a trilogy. I might have agreed with you if it wasn't for all the extra stuff. I loved the book but didn't care for the additions in the movies.

Ok, first of all, don't even talk to me about The Godfather Part 3. As far as I'm concerned, it doesn't exist. It's dead to me. It sleeps with the fishes. Second, 2 is arguably BETTER than the original movie. Like, film school nerds will argue that it's better. So it's at least *as* good as 1. Third, there was so much extraneous, weird crap in the book that *thank goodness* did not make it into the movie. All that stuff about how Sonny had huge junk so his wife didn't want to sleep with him? Wut?

I totally agree with Godfather 3 not existing. None of it was in the book and it all sucked.
As for 2, I loved the flashbacks to Vito's past. That was straight from the book, pretty much exactly how it was written. The rest of it was all new, not from the book. I recall not caring for it. It's been quite a while since I watched it, so maybe I need to give it another chance to see what all those film nerds see in it.

I had forgotten all about Sonny's junk, so I concede that some things were better left out of the movies. I honestly don't think much else was left out, though. Which is good because other than Sonny's monster cock, I loved everything about the book. I just think the movies could have stopped where the book stopped.

sleepy33 · February 2014

Lee81 said:

Lee81 said:

The Godfather. Easily.
Disagree. They added too much that wasn't even in the book to stretch it into a trilogy. I might have agreed with you if it wasn't for all the extra stuff. I loved the book but didn't care for the additions in the movies.

Ok, first of all, don't even talk to me about The Godfather Part 3. As far as I'm concerned, it doesn't exist. It's dead to me. It sleeps with the fishes. Second, 2 is arguably BETTER than the original movie. Like, film school nerds will argue that it's better. So it's at least *as* good as 1. Third, there was so much extraneous, weird crap in the book that *thank goodness* did not make it into the movie. All that stuff about how Sonny had huge junk so his wife didn't want to sleep with him? Wut?
I totally agree with Godfather 3 not existing. None of it was in the book and it all sucked. As for 2, I loved the flashbacks to Vito's past. That was straight from the book, pretty much exactly how it was written. The rest of it was all new, not from the book. I recall not caring for it. It's been quite a while since I watched it, so maybe I need to give it another chance to see what all those film nerds see in it. I had forgotten all about Sonny's junk, so I concede that some things were better left out of the movies. I honestly don't think much else was left out, though. Which is good because other than Sonny's monster cock, I loved everything about the book. I just think the movies could have stopped where the book stopped.

I think a re-watch is in order!

Lee81 · February 2014

sleepy33 said:

Lee81 said:

sleepy33 said:

Lee81 said:

sleepy33 said:
The Godfather. Easily.
Disagree. They added too much that wasn't even in the book to stretch it into a trilogy. I might have agreed with you if it wasn't for all the extra stuff. I loved the book but didn't care for the additions in the movies.

Ok, first of all, don't even talk to me about The Godfather Part 3. As far as I'm concerned, it doesn't exist. It's dead to me. It sleeps with the fishes. Second, 2 is arguably BETTER than the original movie. Like, film school nerds will argue that it's better. So it's at least *as* good as 1. Third, there was so much extraneous, weird crap in the book that *thank goodness* did not make it into the movie. All that stuff about how Sonny had huge junk so his wife didn't want to sleep with him? Wut?
I totally agree with Godfather 3 not existing. None of it was in the book and it all sucked.
As for 2, I loved the flashbacks to Vito's past. That was straight from the book, pretty much exactly how it was written. The rest of it was all new, not from the book. I recall not caring for it. It's been quite a while since I watched it, so maybe I need to give it another chance to see what all those film nerds see in it.

I had forgotten all about Sonny's junk, so I concede that some things were better left out of the movies. I honestly don't think much else was left out, though. Which is good because other than Sonny's monster cock, I loved everything about the book. I just think the movies could have stopped where the book stopped.

I think a re-watch is in order!

I'm on it!
#weekendhomework
#passthepopcorn

Michellepiner · February 2014

I thought The Notebook movie was much better than the book.

I'm curious to see how they will do Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn (they're filming it now).

The book was meh...maybe the movie will be better.

Want a personalized experience?

S/O HP: Name a movie

Re: S/O HP: Name a movie

Choose Another Board

Search Boards