Jurasssic Park:Book and movie were okay, I like both. But "The Lost World" was...I can't say "the movie was better". Book was excellent, but the movie was suck.

Are you talking about "The Lost World" by Michael Crichton or "The Lost World" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle?

FRANKENSTEIN directed by James Whale starring Boris Karloff (and the sequel better than the original film!)

Are you talking about "The Lost World" by Michael Crichton or "The Lost World" by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle?

LOL! Of course I'm talkin' 'bout Michael Crichton's THE LOST WORLD!



Damned! That was terrible movie!

30 Days of Night[SIZE=2]

If there was EVER a movie that was better than the book (in this case, the first book in the series), it was this. The sense of time progression was actually present (literally - it said "7 Days Later," "18 Days Later," etc.), and seeing the vampires actually moving was so much more effective than seeing still drawings that only marginally suggest movement. The movie was MUCH better than the book, IMHO.

And on a side note...holy cow, it was good. I saw it yesterday, and it's already joined 28 Weeks Later (what's up with these month-long period horror movies...?) as one of the most tense and scary horror movies I've seen in the theater. Tense, emotional, moody, atmospheric, EXCELLENTLY directed, and an excellent dark ambient musical score = I liked it a lot.
[/SIZE]

30 Days of Night[SIZE=2]

If there was EVER a movie that was better than the book (in this case, the first book in the series), it was this. The sense of time progression was actually present (literally - it said "7 Days Later," "18 Days Later," etc.), and seeing the vampires actually moving was so much more effective than seeing still drawings that only marginally suggest movement. The movie was MUCH better than the book, IMHO.

And on a side note...holy cow, it was good. I saw it yesterday, and it's already joined 28 Weeks Later (what's up with these month-long period horror movies...?) as one of the most tense and scary horror movies I've seen in the theater. Tense, emotional, moody, atmospheric, EXCELLENTLY directed, and an excellent dark ambient musical score = I liked it a lot.
[/SIZE]

Oh, thank you. I've been waiting to see this!

And I loved 28 Weeks Later, as well. Just like 28 Days Later.

Oh, thank you. I've been waiting to see this!

And I loved 28 Weeks Later, as well. Just like 28 Days Later.

It's that good. They're ALL just that good.

I have always noticed that musicals tend to be better than their book counterparts - even though musical movies aren't necessarily better than the stage version (but, I won't go into that here.)

"The King and I" beats the book "Anna and the King of Siam"

"The Sound of Music" beats "The Trapp Family Story" (I think that was the title)

"Camelot" beats any of the Authurian legends/stories

"Peter Pan" beats the original Barie Story

"State Fair" defintely beats Edna Ferber's original book State Fair, and I believe she also wrote Carousel (but don't hold me to that!)


One exception to this, however is My Fair Lady - based very closely on the Shaw play, Pygmalion. Both are absolutely brilliant...

It's a given that when you read a book before you see the movie based upon it, you'll tend to like the book more. But of course, that ain't always the case - especially when you read the book AFTER the movie.

What are some of your favorite movies that you liked BETTER than the books they were based on?

Here are a few for me...

• The Thirteenth Warrior (I couldn't stand the fact that the book was fiction...but also, the movie had a much more "fun" feel to it)
  
• Stir of Echoes (while the book is that much more atmospheric, the movie has such an edge to it that somehow was missing for me when I read it)
  
• Stardust (funnier, more charming, and altogether "brighter" than the book for me)
  
• Fight Club (only marginally)
  
• The Mothman Prophecies (although I had a lot of things I wanted to see included in the film, it was far, FAR less boring)
  
• L. A. Confidential (okay, so I didn't finish the book, but in the wake of Mr. Ellroy's discovery that he is, without a doubt, the best crime writer currently at work, I kiiiiind of don't have that same sort of want-to-hurt-someone feeling when I watch the excellent movie)
  
• And for the ultimate clincher... 300. I was SCREAMING for movement when I was reading the graphic novel, and the movie not only provided movement, voice, and better atmosphere, but added in whole scenes that, based on the previews alone, I was sorely missing during the read. Not that it was a terribly great movie, however...

I just wonder if 30 Days of Night will be like this, also. I liked the first graphic novel the one time I read it, but like 300, it seems too "frozen" (no pun intended) for the kind of scenes it portrays. It needs the movement, the voices, the atmosphere that a movie could provide.

Your turn!

I will go with OF MICE AND MEN, the original, starring Burgess Meredith and Lon Chaney Jr.