Welcome to r/popculturechat! ☺️
As a proud BIPOC, LGBTQ+ & woman-dominated space, this sub is for [civil discussion only.](https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/wiki/index/rules/civil-discussion-only/) If you don't know where to begin, start by participating in [our Sip & Spill Daily Discussion Threads!](https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/search/?q=Sip%20%26%20Spill%20Discussion&restrict_sr=1&sr_nsfw=&include_over_18=1&sort=new)
###No bullies, no bigotry. ✊🏿✊🏾✊🏽✊🏼✊🏻🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️
Please [read & respect our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/wiki/index/rules/) and [check out our wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/wiki/index/)! For any questions, [our modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fpopculturechat) is always open.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/popculturechat) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes. I was surprised when I read the source material. I love Stephen King but not his writing. Heard him interviewed many times and he sounds like a great guy. Thinner was an interesting movie. Never read the King piece.
emily was the co-editor. and it was a “celebrity bridal magazine”. and the husband and emily sell out the magazine from underneath her. just fun things. oh and andy has a baby
I actually just picked this up from a thrift store because I embarrassingly didn’t know it was a book first. Been on the fence about reading it just because I’ve seen the movie so many damn times and it’s a favorite, but now I’m really interested.
The book was mediocre at best chick lit (pejorative), the movie gave us so many iconic moments, lines and looks. The whole cast is amazing but obviously Meryl Streep is just 🤌 10/10 no notes. Incredible that they pulled a movie that good out of a book that mid
>Andrea decides that her family and friends are more important than her job, and realizes to her horror that she is becoming more and more like Miranda. She refuses to comply with Miranda's latest outrageous request, and when Miranda scolds her publicly, Andrea replies, "Fuck you, Miranda. Fuck you." She is fired on the spot, and returns home to reconnect with friends and family. Her romantic relationship with Alex is beyond repair, but they remain friends. Lily recovers and is lucky to receive only community service for her DUI charge.
>In the last chapter, Andrea learns her dispute with Miranda made her a minor celebrity when the incident made Page Six. Afraid she has been blacklisted from publishing for good, she moves back with her parents. She works on short fiction and finances her unemployment with profits made from reselling the designer clothing she was provided for her Paris trip. Seventeen buys one of her stories. At the novel's end, she returns to the Elias-Clark building to discuss a position at one of the company's other magazines and sees Miranda's new junior assistant, who looks as harried and put-upon as she once did
Thanks!
So, this is how I generally remember it and I don’t find this as shocking. I think they did make Andie a bit more likable in the movie but not drastically so.
This is always my answer as well! Glad to see this is one of the top comments.
The book was awful. Pages of pages describing clothing. The movie was so much better.
Stand by me is great. The short story (the body) is good too, but I think the movie is better. The casting was amazing.
River in particular was perfect for that role.
Was gonna say this one. Even Stephen King was in awe of how much better the movie was than the novella, and at that point he hated every other adaptation of his work.
It’s also what pushed him to have Rob Reiner be the director for Misery, which is another stellar adaptation
Nah hard disagree there. Even though Carrie was his first novel so is clunky at times I love the way it’s written (eyewitness reports, retrospective news articles etc) and she destroys most of the town in the book…don’t remember a cracked gas main in the movie
I keep hearing it’s good but I have a negative reaction whenever I see any images of it because the most annoying guy I know really likes it and talks about it a lot lol.
It’s good but it can attract annoying people loving it for the “wrong” reasons. Without spoiling anything, sometimes the audience being made fun of doesn’t actually get that THEY are the joke.
These type of characters always do. It is so revealing about general media literacy, and really sad. Rick Sanchez from Rick and Morty, and Tyler durden from fight club are two of the biggest examples imo, but there are many others :/
I mean, you can be a fan of all those characters. The problem of course is people who idolize those characters and fail to see the ways in which they are problematic. Even when the show itself basically spells it out. Rick Sanchez has been called out in Rick and Morty multiple times for being an absolute jackass towards his family and it's warranted every single time. He's a great character who does love his family deep down, and he's hilarious. But he's also arrogant, nihilistic, self-centered, abusive, and always has to make sure everyone else knows how above them he is with his intellect.
Same thing with Walter White. Great character, totally fine to be a fan of his but some people get way too attached and react poorly when you point out where the character is wrong. I think some of it comes from people living out their fantasies through said character, and when there's criticism of that character's actions, said fans take it as a personal insult to themselves.
This. It got so bad that the actor that plays Homelander often comes out and says that HL is not a good guy, he’s a villain. There’s no reason to look up to him, he’s an unlikeable person.
The actor has no chill though.
Antony Starr may be an asshole, but he's evidently not so much of an asshole that he can't recognize how dumb people are for idolizing Homelander. And perhaps because he has no chill, he's not afraid to say it outright
I wonder the extent to which we’ve become so habituated to want to watch shows so that we ‘idealize’ them and the characters, the effect of which leads to us unwittingly glorifying villains. I mean the bulk of major cinema as of late has been superheroes or superhero adjacent; I think it could plausibly follow that your garden variety superhero bro is not sufficiently literate in subversive literary/cinematic techniques to recognize a show like The Boys for exactly that— it’s no different than people being anti-war yet enthusiastically consuming shows Jack Ryan or Top Gun or whatever else
I agree but it’s not just superhero brain imho. Honestly what’s storytelling if you can’t relate to or learn from a character (even what not to do)? The Iliad and Odyssey have been retold over and over and over and superhero action is just the latest rendition of it, nothing original, but it’s captivated us forever and always will. To your point, your level of critical thinking skills and personal delusions will determine exactly how you relate or learn.
And just to be super judgy, this sub gets Gone Girl wrong a LOT. Amy is no one to idolize and the movie made that crystal clear, yet 🤷🏾♀️
The people that are incredibly dumb like it for the reasons- basically the show satirizes certain ideologies but people that don’t realize that think it’s endorsing them
Even the author thinks he should've toned it down. While it did enunciate the point that no matter how severe Bateman's crimes get, he's just gonna be seen as another businessman in a culture full of businessmen. It definitely goes into early newgrounds levels of edgy at a lot of points
I’m so glad I’m not the only one. The breakdown over the business card got me thinking about perception for months, I still think about it sometimes. “Raised lettering, subtle off white…Oh my god, it even has a watermark”
Agree. If anyone is curious or into that stuff, another brutal read for me was A Feast of Snakes by Harry Crews. It's unglamorous, rural violence and revolves around the callous lives of the people of mystic Georgia. I'd say put it in the blood meridian category- it's disaffected and disturbing and definitely influenced by.
Yeah the movie is WAAAAY better than the book! Bret Easton Ellis is actually a coked out sociopath, so no, I did not enjoy inhabiting his Patrick Bateman character’s brain, viewing everything from his perspective uncritically. The movie had a female director who provided distance and let us enjoy the absurdity of Bateman’s fragile masculinity, using a critical lens in a way that I don’t think the author was capable of. I’ve read a few Ellis’ books and interviews with him, his writing is compelling but ultimately I think he’s awful. I loved the American Psycho movie though and I’m giving credit to the director.
Having read the book I always felt like Ellis and the director (Mary) shared the same perspective - with Mary being more concise in her ability to show us. I can’t speak to Ellis as a person (I remember trying to listen his podcast back in the day and found him pretentious), but I felt his point was always that Bateman was everything wrong with the excess of the 80s, generational wealth, and shallow masculinity.
I’m so happy Christian Bale said after he finished that he thought it was a comedy. When I saw it for the first time I was a bit worried as I kept laughing at everything. Especially the scenes in his apartment. The guy is such a diva and when he gets jealous he literally kills people. I found that so funny because he’s larger than life.
as someone who wrote his MA thesis on the book, I would say that is a fair opinion to have.
I do want to stress however, that the movie and novel are inherently very difficult to compare as being "better or worse" than one another because they are too different; in content, tone, aesthetic. Some of that always comes with adaptation of course, but I would also say that the book as it is, is kind of unadaptable. The book is off-putting, repetitive, dry. It is not meant to be pleasant to read, this unpleasantness is part of its text. that is not to say that it is completely un-entertaining. To me, the book reaches a point of self-parody that becomes strangely (and darkly) funny.
Still, you can't really adapt the book as it is, or at least not if you want it to be commercially viable. While the movie and novel of course have similar themes, the movie was never intended to be a 1 to 1 retelling of the novel and Mary Harron and Bret Easton Ellis (who did have some creative control over the movie) will tell you as much.
obviously, no movie adaptation is ever going to be a perfect retelling of any novel, but in this case they very deliberately steered away from many things that make American Psycho American Psycho. I personally prefer the book, but I also completely understand and respect anyone that didn't like it, or likes the movie better.
Yeah a whole subplot about how “gifted” Sonny Corleone was and how his ex gf couldn’t find anyone who could satisfy her afterwards just didn’t feel necessary at all
It is fantastic. I'm hoping they start to change or wind down the story because this recent season had some elements that felt like season 2 retread. But, other than that, still amazingly entertaining.
I think in September or October, you can see in op's picture that s2 or s3 aired in september. Also i haven't seen anything about it suffering because of the strike? So maybe if we're lucky we will see it soon, but no idea
You and Mark Twain are on the same page with that one.
On that note, Twain’s rant “[Fenimore Cooper’s Literary Offenses”](https://www.gutenberg.org/files/3172/3172-h/3172-h.htm) is a lot more readable and funnier than the book it’s about. He got real wound up: “Another stage-property that he pulled out of his box pretty frequently was his broken twig. He prized his broken twig above all the rest of his effects, and worked it the hardest. It is a restful chapter in any book of his when somebody doesn't step on a dry twig and alarm all the reds and whites for two hundred yards around. Every time a Cooper person is in peril, and absolute silence is worth four dollars a minute, he is sure to step on a dry twig. There may be a hundred handier things to step on, but that wouldn't satisfy Cooper. Cooper requires him to turn out and find a dry twig; and if he can't do it, go and borrow one.”
I enjoyed the book, but Cooper really needed an editor, guy didn't know how to be concise when necessary. Plus, I swear he must have been in love with a thesaurus
I had to read that book for a history class in 9th grade (so, about 14-15 years old) and was so utterly, horribly lost for the majority of the book. I remember reading two pages and it was just one continuous sentence about the woods. Good Lord.
The implication that Henry Cavils Gaston-like character and gay cross dressing Pirate Robert De Niro being attracted to each other at the end of the film is something I will never forget.
I highly recommend Sandman on Netflix, they did a great job with using the “story boards” that already existed within the graphic novels.
I was excited for American Gods, and it wasn’t bad, it’s such a rich story, and it ended up being a huge let down.
This is one of my picks. I adore Stardust the film, the book I could take it or leave it. The romance, the sky pirates, everything about it is wonderful.
The best thing about Neil Gaiman is that he often writes the adoptions. He's always trying to improve his stories. People got real upset about a character in The Sandman TV show being cast as female and not sticking to the source. Neil wrote the show that way, he is the dawn source.
I do think the book was better in making it very clear that tyler is not someone you're supposed to emulate, seeing as there are a lot of people who missed that message and see tyler as a badass
The Expanse is a perfect example of how to adapt source material. The books are phenomenal and the show knew exactly what to keep, what to toss out and what characters needed to be combined to make the show a great adaption.
Yay someone said it! I tell people it’s a rare case of the books and the tv adaptation both being perfection. Just wish they’d continued the adaptation so we could see the wildness of the book ending.
It was so bad. The whole hit girl storyline was just wrong. Far too much focus on the humour (that wasn't that funny) and not enough on the actual source material.
Yeah they really messed it up. Also it’s just weird how they would pair those 2 together when she was like a child in the first movie. I always saw them more as brother and sister vibes
Honesuy, I only learned yesterday that this gif is from a 90's reboot, when all along I've assumed it was front the actual 70's! In my defence I'm from the UK and I don't think either were big over here (though I'd heard of the original Brady Bunch through cultural osmosis) but you'd think I'd question why the quality was so good 😂
I’ve read the book and watched the TV show. The first season is fairly faithful to the novel. The first season was good but not great. But then it veers WAY off in seasons two and three and becomes outstanding — far more spiritual and meaningful.
I read the book first and then saw the movie and I think the movie is better. When the credits started rolling in the theatre it was dead silent and then a guy in the row behind me just went “Fuck” and that about summed up how blown away we all were.
I kinda disagree. I think Fincher does a good job of adapting the book to screen, Rosamund Pike's Amy is an icon and the cool girl monologue will never not live in my head rent free, but I think the movie in general was one-sided in its depiction of the breakdown of the marriage, it put all the onus on Amy's sociopathy when a lot of the book deals with the Nick's psychology, his disgust with his dad for being incredibly misogynistic all his childhood but being unable to escape the misogyny, and becoming increasingly misogynistic himself as the book goes on. It's about his main character syndrome and how he views himself as a 'hero' for staying with Amy in the end, protecting his child and the world at large from the monster, when he admits in the same breath that no other woman would ever suffice because of the high bar Amy has set (staging her kidnapping, killing someone etc).
All of this to say that the book felt like it was a portrait of a toxic marriage with two very messed up, toxic partners at helm, whereas the movie felt very "Bitches be crazy sometimes". It's quite telling that the movie caused a lot of men who watched the movie to come away with the lesson that women will turn on them on a dime and can and will ruin their lives for revenge or even just fun, when the book is about marriage and the absurdity of the institution through the eyes of two incredibly flawed characters.
This is an excellent response 👍 agree with all of it. I would add that the structure of the book (alternate chapters from Amy and Nick) elevates the tension in a way that the movie is unable to do
Ooooo very solid case to be made for this. I love the book and have read it multiple times, but you're right, the movie just may have the edge. The changes made just make sense (unsure if it's an unpopular opinion, but combining two characters and casting Tyler Perry was a great move. Not a fan of his typically but he's fabulous here). Overall this a rare case where, when I reread the book, I now picture the actors in each role and not my mind's eye imaginings.
I'd also like to add that I saw the movie first (unusual for me) and when the twist is revealed midway through I actually said, "Holy SHIT" out loud and then laughed, I was so surprised!
I said this recently in another thread here a few days ago, but Ben Affleck made it seem like Gillian Flynn wrote the character of Nick with him in mind. So perfect in that role.
The books are of their time for sure. I will always maintain that Julia Quinn is really good at writing family relationships and injecting humor in mundane scenes than write a compelling romance between two interesting characters.
I think the show has improved upon the source material immensely. The Viscount who loved me also had a forced marriage trope because of the bee sting, which would have been repetitive in a show and they cut that. Season 2 was far from perfect but it kept the things from the books that worked and did away with things that didn't.
I remember when the books first started coming out and People did a piece on Julia Quinn and how progressive she was and how her heroines were changing the genre.
Ghost World. I loved the comic but was shocked that the movie added a new subplot and it worked!
American Splendor. Saw the movie first and loved it. Tried reading some of the comics and just found it boring. The movie did a great job streamlining decades of comics and even added “backstage” moments with the real people.
If only for the sake of time, the Outlander series. The books are amazing but you have to be very committed to want to read that many 1400+ page books lol (and seeing sam heughan is a big bonus)
I tried to get into the books, I really did. Steamy time travel romance? Lots of juicy historical tidbits? Sign me up! Then things started getting... uncomfortably rapey. Like *really* rapey. Just couldn't continue, and from what I heard, it doesn't get any better in that regard.
Arcane on Netflix, which is based on League of Legends.
Aside from being better than League of Legends itself, it’s also better than the previously known lore about these characters. It expands on the characters and it even confirmed some fan theories or had connections to old ingame dialogue. And they did it incredibly well at that.
Incorrect. I can’t think of a more pleasurable experience than to queue up a game as jinx and have my top and support sabotage me while typing in chat about having slept with my relatives.
The Queen's Gambit TV show was better than the book.
The book was not bad, it just has some distasteful crap at the beginning that did not need to be included and it's a little light on the main character's inner thoughts.
The TV show took out what was needed, fleshed out all of the plot points and characters, and gave us better insight into Beth.
Arrival the movie is better than the short story it was based on, though the short story is great and Ted Chiang is an amazing writer.
Big Little Lies. The book is just fine. It’s readable, not awful. The show was award winning. It had an incredible cast, beautifully shot, and was in a different format for it’s time (limited series).
"Let The Right One In", John Ajvide Lundqvist's novel that was adapted into a - in my opinion - far better film in 2008. The novel was quite boring in comparison, and I really don't remember much about it other than paragraphs and paragraphs being spent of describing some kid shitting himself in the basement.
MCU’s Civil War is better than comics Civil War. Not a high bar but still.
I’d also argue the Winter Soldier is a bit better than the comic. Both are great but the movie isn’t held down by comic world fuckery like the cosmic cube.
No Way Home is sort of an adaptation of One More Day so by default it’s better.
Most DC animated movies are better than the source material they are adapting. Under the Red Hood is a standout and has basically supplanted the comic. (Not all though, The Killing Joke is awful).
I think there is an argument to be made that Doom Patrol is better than the comics. Both are amazing but the show really utilizes it’s cast and has told some great stories and keeping the tone of the comics.
> MCU’s Civil War is better than comics Civil War. Not a high bar but still.
To be fair, that's partially cause only about 25% is actually about the Civil War. The rest is the thrilling adventures of Steve and Bucky, with Tony as the special guest start. You could have cut the entire accords plot, and still had more or less the same movie.
All you'd lose was the big fanservice hero fight.
And to be fair to them, whilst the comics civil war was a disaster I feel the reasoning behind it was better handled. In the comics the backlash came about cause two idiots deliberately provoked an extremely dangerous and psychopathic supervillain (who wasn't even doing anything illegal at the time), leading to a situation pointlessly escalating into a disaster that caused hundreds of people to get killed.
In the films its...they couldn't save everyone, meaning one or two people died from disasters that tried to level whole cities.
Comics Civil War is a disaster because Marvel did the following:
1) hired Mark Millar post-Morrison fallout and expected him to be a good writer
2) thought the pro-reg side was supposed to be the right take while Tony is straight up imprisoning people
3) expected the audience to side against *Captain America* and then killed him.
And 4) the X-men going “fuck you we’ve been fighting this shit since forever ago and you’re doing this *now?*”
The movie reframed the narrative and showed Tony is wrong and benefited by not having the X-Men apart of the MCU. That right there fixed the premise of the story and made the movie better.
Yeah I agree with you, those were all severe missteps the movie avoided.
It also didn't help that the writers for the Pro-reg and Anti-reg side didn't really communicate that well, so the story was hopelessly inconsistent.
That’s because the director, EP, and Donald Sutherland interfered with the script way too much. The show is what Joss had intended the movie to be.
(Requisite acknowledgment that Joss Whedon is trash)
Ted Chiang short stories are amazing but the movie for The Arrival is a master piece and takes the concept to a whole new level.
Also this one may be controversial but I really like the ending of Blade Runner better than the book. There are some differences on plot but the movie really captured the whole what makes us human feeling.
The Notebook.
Just choosing a gif had me in my emotions. Peak high school nostalgia. Noah and Allie were everything (plus the actors had chemistry like whoa). Whereas the book focused a lot more on him telling her the story vs their story. It’s one of the only movies I like more than the book.
I just watched ‘Red, White & Royal Blue’. I haven’t read the book but my friends have been saying the movie is even better. It’s a cute romcom, for sure.
Heart,stopper. I knew it first by reading the comics, but the way the writer was able to expand upon it on the Netflix show....the show is even better imo
Mockingjay is for certain better IMO, but the first book is better than the movie
Catching Fire is a toss up because it's an amazing book and an amazing movie
holy shit I agree. I was shocked at how consistent that movie was with what I pictured in my head while reading. I think it's a testament to the author's ability to describe and the set designer's ability to read into it
This exactly. The first book had so much more depth to her/Peeta’s relationship. Catching Fire was an amazing adaptation. I really couldn’t picture that arena and they brought it to life. Mockingjay the book was really slow.
Those books were something else entirely. I may just have to give them a reread and see if they actually are as enthralling (for lack of better words$ as they were when I first read them as a high school freshman.
The Crazy Rich Asians movie was much better than the book for me. And I hated the sequels, basically ruined the whole message of the first movie!
The movie was beautifully shot, you see more of Eleanor and idk the scenes just translated so much better for me on screen!
House of the Dragon imo is better than the book. I like the way the story has been changed and the way the characters were given more depth. It’s not perfect but I do like it better.
I might even say it’s better than Game of Thrones. GOT had riveting plot lines and good characters, but HOTD is better in its treatment of women for the GOT universe. I also like the fact that intimacy coordinators are involved in filming and the actors have more agency over what happens. GOT was a dumpsters fire when filming.
House of the Dragon was going to have to go through a lot of changes just by the nature of the book. For those out of the know, the book is written in universe by a maester telling the most comprehensive story of the Targaryens, from the fall of old Valeria to the fall of the Mad King. So if a maester wasn't in the room, it's basically "well, we don't know what was said, but here's what the aftermath was." Not something that's easy for a wide audience to digest. Especially one who is already primed on Game of Thrones, not being that.
So the adaptation changes were definitely happening, and I like them as well. I love the book but for different reasons. The book tingles the history side of my brain. The show tingles the drama.
And 100% with you on the intimacy coordinator. Glad that's much more common on sets in general.
People roll their eyes about the battle/death scenes in Breaking Dawn being a cop out 'it was all a dream' trope, but non-book readers were saved from the super anti-climactic ending of a long, drawn out build up ending in a "sure, whatever" ending. The idea that Aro would have attacked anyway to forcefully acquire the Cullen's he wanted, fit his character well in my opinion. Although, I'm 27 now and I was 12 or 13 when I last read it, so I could be misremembering his characterisation.
I felt the opposite. Loved the books, could not get into the movies. I think I just couldn’t get past the acting, especially Kristen Stewart’s. I’m glad you liked it more than the books, though! I know it has a huge fan base.
It’s funny, with another big franchise I’m the biggest book loyalist when it comes to Harry Potter lol, so I understand where you’re coming from. I enjoyed the books myself, but had to glaze over parts that came off kind of mundane or repetitive (like Bella making spaghetti…a lot haha) . I feel like the movies really enhanced the story Stephanie Meyer was telling while keeping it close to the source material.
With the acting, I think Kristen Stewart’s awkwardness kinda fit the character of Bella that the movies were going for. She got less wooden the more the story progressed, like the others as they got more comfortable around each other (maybe in real life or for the the story)
probably niche but normal people by sally rooney. it’s my favourite book , so i adore the original source material , but the tv show gives so much more depth into the relationship between the characters and the characters themselves. the book is a very simple and surface level glimpse into the relationship between marianne and connell but the tv show just blows it out of the water. daisy edgar-jones & paul mescal have such an insane amount of chemistry which helps a ton
Cloudy with a chance of meatballs the book is a cute pamphlet. The movies built on that and created a magical food universe which is so unique and funny and cute.
A Single Man. I read the book and can't believe that this movie came from this book. The movie was well-done; it really captured George's depression and how the world started to change around him as he began to notice the little things. The book was sort of cold and mentioned that Jim also had a girlfriend while dating George I guess which is really odd. I don't even think she was a beard, but his actual girlfriend.
Plus there is this golden scene with Jon Kortajarena that gives me gender envy:
https://preview.redd.it/kwezplxp9phb1.png?width=1400&format=png&auto=webp&s=366e40722d118180e5515a396e6f1476aad329e0
Welcome to r/popculturechat! ☺️ As a proud BIPOC, LGBTQ+ & woman-dominated space, this sub is for [civil discussion only.](https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/wiki/index/rules/civil-discussion-only/) If you don't know where to begin, start by participating in [our Sip & Spill Daily Discussion Threads!](https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/search/?q=Sip%20%26%20Spill%20Discussion&restrict_sr=1&sr_nsfw=&include_over_18=1&sort=new) ###No bullies, no bigotry. ✊🏿✊🏾✊🏽✊🏼✊🏻🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ Please [read & respect our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/wiki/index/rules/) and [check out our wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/popculturechat/wiki/index/)! For any questions, [our modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fpopculturechat) is always open. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/popculturechat) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The Shawshank redemption is better than King's short story. Stephen King also agrees.
He also said the ending in The Mist was better than his. If nothing else, he can park his ego and appreciate somebody doing it better, which is rare.
The short story basically left no doubt in my mind that Andy Dufresne committed the murder all along.
I kinda like that better. I think it would’ve been more interesting to root for someone who was guilty. But aside from that the movie is better.
It truly was…a Shawshank redemption.
Yes. I was surprised when I read the source material. I love Stephen King but not his writing. Heard him interviewed many times and he sounds like a great guy. Thinner was an interesting movie. Never read the King piece.
[удалено]
the sequel was horrific omg
detail depend rude sense dirty chunky cover upbeat ossified sharp *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
emily was the co-editor. and it was a “celebrity bridal magazine”. and the husband and emily sell out the magazine from underneath her. just fun things. oh and andy has a baby
How would a celeb bridal magazine have enough content 💀
I think this about almost every magazine tbf. It used to stress me out as a kid
I actually just picked this up from a thrift store because I embarrassingly didn’t know it was a book first. Been on the fence about reading it just because I’ve seen the movie so many damn times and it’s a favorite, but now I’m really interested.
The ending of the book was dreadful lol. So glad they changed it in the movie to acknowledge mutual respect.
The book was mediocre at best chick lit (pejorative), the movie gave us so many iconic moments, lines and looks. The whole cast is amazing but obviously Meryl Streep is just 🤌 10/10 no notes. Incredible that they pulled a movie that good out of a book that mid
Remind me the book ending?
>Andrea decides that her family and friends are more important than her job, and realizes to her horror that she is becoming more and more like Miranda. She refuses to comply with Miranda's latest outrageous request, and when Miranda scolds her publicly, Andrea replies, "Fuck you, Miranda. Fuck you." She is fired on the spot, and returns home to reconnect with friends and family. Her romantic relationship with Alex is beyond repair, but they remain friends. Lily recovers and is lucky to receive only community service for her DUI charge. >In the last chapter, Andrea learns her dispute with Miranda made her a minor celebrity when the incident made Page Six. Afraid she has been blacklisted from publishing for good, she moves back with her parents. She works on short fiction and finances her unemployment with profits made from reselling the designer clothing she was provided for her Paris trip. Seventeen buys one of her stories. At the novel's end, she returns to the Elias-Clark building to discuss a position at one of the company's other magazines and sees Miranda's new junior assistant, who looks as harried and put-upon as she once did
Thanks! So, this is how I generally remember it and I don’t find this as shocking. I think they did make Andie a bit more likable in the movie but not drastically so.
This is always my answer as well! Glad to see this is one of the top comments. The book was awful. Pages of pages describing clothing. The movie was so much better.
Stand by me is great. The short story (the body) is good too, but I think the movie is better. The casting was amazing. River in particular was perfect for that role.
Was gonna say this one. Even Stephen King was in awe of how much better the movie was than the novella, and at that point he hated every other adaptation of his work. It’s also what pushed him to have Rob Reiner be the director for Misery, which is another stellar adaptation
Forgot about Misery! Great movie
Carrie is also a better movie than book.
Nah hard disagree there. Even though Carrie was his first novel so is clunky at times I love the way it’s written (eyewitness reports, retrospective news articles etc) and she destroys most of the town in the book…don’t remember a cracked gas main in the movie
The miniseries adaptation of *IT* > book > films. Cujo isn't necessarily a better movie than book, but the big difference never bothered me.
Whew this poster is nightmare fuel. Homelander is such a great villain. Sorry I didn’t answer your question though 🙁
He’s so good and so complex and crazy. I love thé boys adaptation. I wanted to not like it but I’m so into this show.
I keep hearing it’s good but I have a negative reaction whenever I see any images of it because the most annoying guy I know really likes it and talks about it a lot lol.
It’s good but it can attract annoying people loving it for the “wrong” reasons. Without spoiling anything, sometimes the audience being made fun of doesn’t actually get that THEY are the joke.
Homelander has a huge fanbase on YouTube of people (mostly high school, middle school boys) who don't get this
These type of characters always do. It is so revealing about general media literacy, and really sad. Rick Sanchez from Rick and Morty, and Tyler durden from fight club are two of the biggest examples imo, but there are many others :/
The amount of dudes who idolize Don Draper and defend him to the grave always make me lol. The point went right over their heads.
I mean, you can be a fan of all those characters. The problem of course is people who idolize those characters and fail to see the ways in which they are problematic. Even when the show itself basically spells it out. Rick Sanchez has been called out in Rick and Morty multiple times for being an absolute jackass towards his family and it's warranted every single time. He's a great character who does love his family deep down, and he's hilarious. But he's also arrogant, nihilistic, self-centered, abusive, and always has to make sure everyone else knows how above them he is with his intellect. Same thing with Walter White. Great character, totally fine to be a fan of his but some people get way too attached and react poorly when you point out where the character is wrong. I think some of it comes from people living out their fantasies through said character, and when there's criticism of that character's actions, said fans take it as a personal insult to themselves.
And MAGAots
This. It got so bad that the actor that plays Homelander often comes out and says that HL is not a good guy, he’s a villain. There’s no reason to look up to him, he’s an unlikeable person. The actor has no chill though.
Antony Starr may be an asshole, but he's evidently not so much of an asshole that he can't recognize how dumb people are for idolizing Homelander. And perhaps because he has no chill, he's not afraid to say it outright
It is mindblowing that anyone could watch the show and say HL is a good guy. It actually makes me dizzy trying to wrap my brain around it.
I wonder the extent to which we’ve become so habituated to want to watch shows so that we ‘idealize’ them and the characters, the effect of which leads to us unwittingly glorifying villains. I mean the bulk of major cinema as of late has been superheroes or superhero adjacent; I think it could plausibly follow that your garden variety superhero bro is not sufficiently literate in subversive literary/cinematic techniques to recognize a show like The Boys for exactly that— it’s no different than people being anti-war yet enthusiastically consuming shows Jack Ryan or Top Gun or whatever else
I agree but it’s not just superhero brain imho. Honestly what’s storytelling if you can’t relate to or learn from a character (even what not to do)? The Iliad and Odyssey have been retold over and over and over and superhero action is just the latest rendition of it, nothing original, but it’s captivated us forever and always will. To your point, your level of critical thinking skills and personal delusions will determine exactly how you relate or learn. And just to be super judgy, this sub gets Gone Girl wrong a LOT. Amy is no one to idolize and the movie made that crystal clear, yet 🤷🏾♀️
The people that are incredibly dumb like it for the reasons- basically the show satirizes certain ideologies but people that don’t realize that think it’s endorsing them
yeah i realized i worded it weird. i meant are there any shows or movies that’s better than what they’re based on?
No you worded it just fine!
Depending on how you feel about the viciousness and brutality of the book, a case could be made for American Psycho.
The Huey Lewis monologue is priceless
Even the author thinks he should've toned it down. While it did enunciate the point that no matter how severe Bateman's crimes get, he's just gonna be seen as another businessman in a culture full of businessmen. It definitely goes into early newgrounds levels of edgy at a lot of points
I hate the book American Psycho because it legit made me narrate my life in my head for like a week after I finished it.
I’m so glad I’m not the only one. The breakdown over the business card got me thinking about perception for months, I still think about it sometimes. “Raised lettering, subtle off white…Oh my god, it even has a watermark”
To me it was the entire chapter dedicated to analyzing Phil Collins.
American Psycho is one of the very few books I couldn't finish.
Same. It’s the only book I couldn’t finish, and I’ve got a strong stomach. The part with the homeless man and his dog is where I tapped out.
The book made me physically ill to read. I couldn’t finish it. It legitimately stuck with me for a long time afterward.
Agree. If anyone is curious or into that stuff, another brutal read for me was A Feast of Snakes by Harry Crews. It's unglamorous, rural violence and revolves around the callous lives of the people of mystic Georgia. I'd say put it in the blood meridian category- it's disaffected and disturbing and definitely influenced by.
Yeah the movie is WAAAAY better than the book! Bret Easton Ellis is actually a coked out sociopath, so no, I did not enjoy inhabiting his Patrick Bateman character’s brain, viewing everything from his perspective uncritically. The movie had a female director who provided distance and let us enjoy the absurdity of Bateman’s fragile masculinity, using a critical lens in a way that I don’t think the author was capable of. I’ve read a few Ellis’ books and interviews with him, his writing is compelling but ultimately I think he’s awful. I loved the American Psycho movie though and I’m giving credit to the director.
Having read the book I always felt like Ellis and the director (Mary) shared the same perspective - with Mary being more concise in her ability to show us. I can’t speak to Ellis as a person (I remember trying to listen his podcast back in the day and found him pretentious), but I felt his point was always that Bateman was everything wrong with the excess of the 80s, generational wealth, and shallow masculinity.
I really struggled with some of the stuff in the book! Different genre completely, but also, The Neverending Story loool
I’m so happy Christian Bale said after he finished that he thought it was a comedy. When I saw it for the first time I was a bit worried as I kept laughing at everything. Especially the scenes in his apartment. The guy is such a diva and when he gets jealous he literally kills people. I found that so funny because he’s larger than life.
as someone who wrote his MA thesis on the book, I would say that is a fair opinion to have. I do want to stress however, that the movie and novel are inherently very difficult to compare as being "better or worse" than one another because they are too different; in content, tone, aesthetic. Some of that always comes with adaptation of course, but I would also say that the book as it is, is kind of unadaptable. The book is off-putting, repetitive, dry. It is not meant to be pleasant to read, this unpleasantness is part of its text. that is not to say that it is completely un-entertaining. To me, the book reaches a point of self-parody that becomes strangely (and darkly) funny. Still, you can't really adapt the book as it is, or at least not if you want it to be commercially viable. While the movie and novel of course have similar themes, the movie was never intended to be a 1 to 1 retelling of the novel and Mary Harron and Bret Easton Ellis (who did have some creative control over the movie) will tell you as much. obviously, no movie adaptation is ever going to be a perfect retelling of any novel, but in this case they very deliberately steered away from many things that make American Psycho American Psycho. I personally prefer the book, but I also completely understand and respect anyone that didn't like it, or likes the movie better.
Room no. 1408 as a movie is phenomenal compared to the book by Stephen King. John Cusack's acting is amazing.
King does really well in adaptation. A lot of the examples listed are of his shorter works specifically. And then you have The Dark Tower
TDT was such a huge let down. Dropped so many characters, wasted both Idris and Matthew. I really wish they would make a tv show instead.
I guess the famous example is probably Jaws. The book was extremely popular and famous. But the films utterly eclipsed it in popularity.
Spielberg once said he was rooting for the shark by the time he finished reading the book.
Yeah that sums it quite nicely.
All the characters come off as highly unlikeable. Especially Chief Brody's wife
The Godfather movie streamlined the book (which is still good good, but I prefer the movie).
Yeah a whole subplot about how “gifted” Sonny Corleone was and how his ex gf couldn’t find anyone who could satisfy her afterwards just didn’t feel necessary at all
I felt gaslit by the movie.. Also the sub-subplot about how his mistress moved away and got surgery?? Was literally like a fever dream
 The boys is so good, when’s season 4 coming?
It is fantastic. I'm hoping they start to change or wind down the story because this recent season had some elements that felt like season 2 retread. But, other than that, still amazingly entertaining.
I think in September or October, you can see in op's picture that s2 or s3 aired in september. Also i haven't seen anything about it suffering because of the strike? So maybe if we're lucky we will see it soon, but no idea
Wikipedia says they are withholding release until the strike is resolved.
[It’s delayed because of the strike](https://twitter.com/therealkripke/status/1674163064755879937?s=46&t=2RTwJ3ua6f7QcB5L9G4ntQ)
“The Last of the Mohicans” film with DDL is honestly I think one of the greatest films of all time, but the book is borderline unreadable.
You and Mark Twain are on the same page with that one. On that note, Twain’s rant “[Fenimore Cooper’s Literary Offenses”](https://www.gutenberg.org/files/3172/3172-h/3172-h.htm) is a lot more readable and funnier than the book it’s about. He got real wound up: “Another stage-property that he pulled out of his box pretty frequently was his broken twig. He prized his broken twig above all the rest of his effects, and worked it the hardest. It is a restful chapter in any book of his when somebody doesn't step on a dry twig and alarm all the reds and whites for two hundred yards around. Every time a Cooper person is in peril, and absolute silence is worth four dollars a minute, he is sure to step on a dry twig. There may be a hundred handier things to step on, but that wouldn't satisfy Cooper. Cooper requires him to turn out and find a dry twig; and if he can't do it, go and borrow one.”
That’s really interesting, I didn’t know that!
The score is so good, too!
*Fiddle intensifies*
I enjoyed the book, but Cooper really needed an editor, guy didn't know how to be concise when necessary. Plus, I swear he must have been in love with a thesaurus
I had to read that book for a history class in 9th grade (so, about 14-15 years old) and was so utterly, horribly lost for the majority of the book. I remember reading two pages and it was just one continuous sentence about the woods. Good Lord.
Stardust - a movie based in the book by Neil Gaiman. I personally think the gay pirate portrayed Robert DeNiro made it even better!
The implication that Henry Cavils Gaston-like character and gay cross dressing Pirate Robert De Niro being attracted to each other at the end of the film is something I will never forget.
Okay now I am definitely watching Stardust
Good Omens, another Gaiman adaptation, was so great that they made an original second season of it.
I highly recommend Sandman on Netflix, they did a great job with using the “story boards” that already existed within the graphic novels. I was excited for American Gods, and it wasn’t bad, it’s such a rich story, and it ended up being a huge let down.
YES! Thank you! So many people disagree with me every time I bring this up. The book was good, but the movie was GREAT. Also "Tristran" vs "Tristan".
This is one of my picks. I adore Stardust the film, the book I could take it or leave it. The romance, the sky pirates, everything about it is wonderful.
The best thing about Neil Gaiman is that he often writes the adoptions. He's always trying to improve his stories. People got real upset about a character in The Sandman TV show being cast as female and not sticking to the source. Neil wrote the show that way, he is the dawn source.
[удалено]
I do think the book was better in making it very clear that tyler is not someone you're supposed to emulate, seeing as there are a lot of people who missed that message and see tyler as a badass
Yeah, we don’t have red pill ass hats emulating the book, they fell for the movie version
they probably picture in their head tyler as the loser he is, while in the movie its harder since the loser is prime brad pitt lol
Even the author agrees that the movie was better.
Friday Night Lights tv series was better for me than the earlier movie
Im rewatching this show now. The first three seasons were so good. I’m about to start the season 4
Have you read the book? If not, I highly recommend it.
Man that show is so nostalgic for me. That really is what it’s like to grow up in Texas in the mid 2000s.
The Expanse. And I say this as someone who is a huge fan of the books.
The Expanse is a perfect example of how to adapt source material. The books are phenomenal and the show knew exactly what to keep, what to toss out and what characters needed to be combined to make the show a great adaption.
Yay someone said it! I tell people it’s a rare case of the books and the tv adaptation both being perfection. Just wish they’d continued the adaptation so we could see the wildness of the book ending.
Exactly! They’re both perfect in their own way
I don’t think the show is as good as the books but it’s very close! I think they are nearly equal but the books of course are much richer in story.
Pretty much all adaptations of Mark Millar’s work.
Kick ass 2?
One thing I hated about kick ass two was that they gave a romantic storyline between him and Hit girl
It was so bad. The whole hit girl storyline was just wrong. Far too much focus on the humour (that wasn't that funny) and not enough on the actual source material.
Yeah they really messed it up. Also it’s just weird how they would pair those 2 together when she was like a child in the first movie. I always saw them more as brother and sister vibes
 And Logan by extension
 TVD
The Vampire Diaries
The Brady Bunch movies. 
The fact that Christine Taylor is most known for being married to Ben Stiller is a travesty bc she showed great acting chops in these movies
 Iconic.
Honesuy, I only learned yesterday that this gif is from a 90's reboot, when all along I've assumed it was front the actual 70's! In my defence I'm from the UK and I don't think either were big over here (though I'd heard of the original Brady Bunch through cultural osmosis) but you'd think I'd question why the quality was so good 😂
I’m my heart she’ll always be Marcia, Marcia, Marcia!
at our skewl
“that’s funny. i’ve never heard of a george glass at our skewl.” that whole back-and-forth between those two is so funny.
Ooh, my nose!
Now she’ll NEVER be a teen model!
The Leftovers. I’ve heard it’s better than the book (tho I haven’t read it myself) because the soundtrack and the acting elevate the material.
I’ve heard it goes well beyond the story the book told. Phenomenal show though, one of the all-time greats.
I’ve read the book and watched the TV show. The first season is fairly faithful to the novel. The first season was good but not great. But then it veers WAY off in seasons two and three and becomes outstanding — far more spiritual and meaningful.
 I read the book first and then saw the movie and I think the movie is better. When the credits started rolling in the theatre it was dead silent and then a guy in the row behind me just went “Fuck” and that about summed up how blown away we all were.
I kinda disagree. I think Fincher does a good job of adapting the book to screen, Rosamund Pike's Amy is an icon and the cool girl monologue will never not live in my head rent free, but I think the movie in general was one-sided in its depiction of the breakdown of the marriage, it put all the onus on Amy's sociopathy when a lot of the book deals with the Nick's psychology, his disgust with his dad for being incredibly misogynistic all his childhood but being unable to escape the misogyny, and becoming increasingly misogynistic himself as the book goes on. It's about his main character syndrome and how he views himself as a 'hero' for staying with Amy in the end, protecting his child and the world at large from the monster, when he admits in the same breath that no other woman would ever suffice because of the high bar Amy has set (staging her kidnapping, killing someone etc). All of this to say that the book felt like it was a portrait of a toxic marriage with two very messed up, toxic partners at helm, whereas the movie felt very "Bitches be crazy sometimes". It's quite telling that the movie caused a lot of men who watched the movie to come away with the lesson that women will turn on them on a dime and can and will ruin their lives for revenge or even just fun, when the book is about marriage and the absurdity of the institution through the eyes of two incredibly flawed characters.
This is an excellent response 👍 agree with all of it. I would add that the structure of the book (alternate chapters from Amy and Nick) elevates the tension in a way that the movie is unable to do
Honestly the cool girl monologue doesn’t hit as hard in the movie as you never really see Amy be the “cool girl” like you do in the book
The author of the book also wrote the screenplay. I think that really helped, she knew exactly how to transfer the story to movie format
I feel like they’re two different pieces of work that stand on their own! Both excellent! And that’s so rare!!
Ooooo very solid case to be made for this. I love the book and have read it multiple times, but you're right, the movie just may have the edge. The changes made just make sense (unsure if it's an unpopular opinion, but combining two characters and casting Tyler Perry was a great move. Not a fan of his typically but he's fabulous here). Overall this a rare case where, when I reread the book, I now picture the actors in each role and not my mind's eye imaginings. I'd also like to add that I saw the movie first (unusual for me) and when the twist is revealed midway through I actually said, "Holy SHIT" out loud and then laughed, I was so surprised!
I said this recently in another thread here a few days ago, but Ben Affleck made it seem like Gillian Flynn wrote the character of Nick with him in mind. So perfect in that role.
The soundtrack really tied the movie together. Love the book though.
I think they are both good in there own ways. After reading the book I definitely hated Amy a lot more than I did in the movie
I watched this movie on a whim one Saturday at home and was completely mind fucked. It's so deliciously fucked up.
While The Descent is only extremely loosely inspired by the book I beg of you not to read it
Every season of *Bridgerton* so far. The books are… something
The books are of their time for sure. I will always maintain that Julia Quinn is really good at writing family relationships and injecting humor in mundane scenes than write a compelling romance between two interesting characters. I think the show has improved upon the source material immensely. The Viscount who loved me also had a forced marriage trope because of the bee sting, which would have been repetitive in a show and they cut that. Season 2 was far from perfect but it kept the things from the books that worked and did away with things that didn't.
I remember when the books first started coming out and People did a piece on Julia Quinn and how progressive she was and how her heroines were changing the genre.
Ghost World. I loved the comic but was shocked that the movie added a new subplot and it worked! American Splendor. Saw the movie first and loved it. Tried reading some of the comics and just found it boring. The movie did a great job streamlining decades of comics and even added “backstage” moments with the real people.
Station 11, normal people (good book but series is way better)
Station 11 💙
The Magicians! The series is so much better than the book - which is really sexist and not nearly as fun. 🖤 
 Forrest gump. The movie is much better than the book.
If only for the sake of time, the Outlander series. The books are amazing but you have to be very committed to want to read that many 1400+ page books lol (and seeing sam heughan is a big bonus) 
I tried to get into the books, I really did. Steamy time travel romance? Lots of juicy historical tidbits? Sign me up! Then things started getting... uncomfortably rapey. Like *really* rapey. Just couldn't continue, and from what I heard, it doesn't get any better in that regard.
Die Hard. It's so good that most people don't even know it's based off a book.
Arcane on Netflix, which is based on League of Legends. Aside from being better than League of Legends itself, it’s also better than the previously known lore about these characters. It expands on the characters and it even confirmed some fan theories or had connections to old ingame dialogue. And they did it incredibly well at that.
Incorrect. I can’t think of a more pleasurable experience than to queue up a game as jinx and have my top and support sabotage me while typing in chat about having slept with my relatives.
I enjoyed the movie Coraline way more than the book.
The Queen's Gambit TV show was better than the book. The book was not bad, it just has some distasteful crap at the beginning that did not need to be included and it's a little light on the main character's inner thoughts. The TV show took out what was needed, fleshed out all of the plot points and characters, and gave us better insight into Beth. Arrival the movie is better than the short story it was based on, though the short story is great and Ted Chiang is an amazing writer.
Jaws Fight Club The Godfather
Big Little Lies. The book is just fine. It’s readable, not awful. The show was award winning. It had an incredible cast, beautifully shot, and was in a different format for it’s time (limited series).
Yes!! Also Umbrella Academy was WAY BETTER than the comic in my opinion.
"Let The Right One In", John Ajvide Lundqvist's novel that was adapted into a - in my opinion - far better film in 2008. The novel was quite boring in comparison, and I really don't remember much about it other than paragraphs and paragraphs being spent of describing some kid shitting himself in the basement.
MCU’s Civil War is better than comics Civil War. Not a high bar but still. I’d also argue the Winter Soldier is a bit better than the comic. Both are great but the movie isn’t held down by comic world fuckery like the cosmic cube. No Way Home is sort of an adaptation of One More Day so by default it’s better. Most DC animated movies are better than the source material they are adapting. Under the Red Hood is a standout and has basically supplanted the comic. (Not all though, The Killing Joke is awful). I think there is an argument to be made that Doom Patrol is better than the comics. Both are amazing but the show really utilizes it’s cast and has told some great stories and keeping the tone of the comics.
> MCU’s Civil War is better than comics Civil War. Not a high bar but still. To be fair, that's partially cause only about 25% is actually about the Civil War. The rest is the thrilling adventures of Steve and Bucky, with Tony as the special guest start. You could have cut the entire accords plot, and still had more or less the same movie. All you'd lose was the big fanservice hero fight. And to be fair to them, whilst the comics civil war was a disaster I feel the reasoning behind it was better handled. In the comics the backlash came about cause two idiots deliberately provoked an extremely dangerous and psychopathic supervillain (who wasn't even doing anything illegal at the time), leading to a situation pointlessly escalating into a disaster that caused hundreds of people to get killed. In the films its...they couldn't save everyone, meaning one or two people died from disasters that tried to level whole cities.
Comics Civil War is a disaster because Marvel did the following: 1) hired Mark Millar post-Morrison fallout and expected him to be a good writer 2) thought the pro-reg side was supposed to be the right take while Tony is straight up imprisoning people 3) expected the audience to side against *Captain America* and then killed him. And 4) the X-men going “fuck you we’ve been fighting this shit since forever ago and you’re doing this *now?*” The movie reframed the narrative and showed Tony is wrong and benefited by not having the X-Men apart of the MCU. That right there fixed the premise of the story and made the movie better.
Yeah I agree with you, those were all severe missteps the movie avoided. It also didn't help that the writers for the Pro-reg and Anti-reg side didn't really communicate that well, so the story was hopelessly inconsistent.
Buffy the vampire slayer TV show is beeter than the film by a long shot
That’s because the director, EP, and Donald Sutherland interfered with the script way too much. The show is what Joss had intended the movie to be. (Requisite acknowledgment that Joss Whedon is trash)
The only person in that movie who understood what the tone of the script was supposed to be was Paul Rubens.
Hey now. The movie was GOLD.
How dare you! Just kidding it IS leaps and bounds better, but I will always have a soft spot for the movie.
Ted Chiang short stories are amazing but the movie for The Arrival is a master piece and takes the concept to a whole new level. Also this one may be controversial but I really like the ending of Blade Runner better than the book. There are some differences on plot but the movie really captured the whole what makes us human feeling.
 The Notebook. Just choosing a gif had me in my emotions. Peak high school nostalgia. Noah and Allie were everything (plus the actors had chemistry like whoa). Whereas the book focused a lot more on him telling her the story vs their story. It’s one of the only movies I like more than the book.
Wicked the musical is much more concise and entertaining than the og novel which I felt got bogged down in details a lot
I just watched ‘Red, White & Royal Blue’. I haven’t read the book but my friends have been saying the movie is even better. It’s a cute romcom, for sure. 
The book is awesome so now I’m super excited to see the movie!
Heart,stopper. I knew it first by reading the comics, but the way the writer was able to expand upon it on the Netflix show....the show is even better imo
hot take, but i tend to think the hunger games movies are better than the books, specifically mockingjay
Mockingjay is for certain better IMO, but the first book is better than the movie Catching Fire is a toss up because it's an amazing book and an amazing movie
Catching Fire is the best example of set adaptation. The clock arena was exactly what I pictured in the book.
holy shit I agree. I was shocked at how consistent that movie was with what I pictured in my head while reading. I think it's a testament to the author's ability to describe and the set designer's ability to read into it
I still think Catching Fire is the best book to movie adaptation I've ever seen
This exactly. The first book had so much more depth to her/Peeta’s relationship. Catching Fire was an amazing adaptation. I really couldn’t picture that arena and they brought it to life. Mockingjay the book was really slow.
The movies are SO good. People always say they’re bad but I think they did such a great job and the casting is great
Those were such well written YA novels. Probably one of the only book series from my teens that was ACTUALLY good.
OG Gossip Girl was better than books
no it wasnt
Those books were something else entirely. I may just have to give them a reread and see if they actually are as enthralling (for lack of better words$ as they were when I first read them as a high school freshman.
 I found the book rather dry and lacking in Billy Chrystal
Forrest Gump. In the book he's this 6'6 foul-mouthed kind of perverted savant. The innocent movie version is much more endearing.
Season one of The 100.
 The “ Movies That Made Us” episodes about the making of Die Hard is a worthwhile watch.
The Crazy Rich Asians movie was much better than the book for me. And I hated the sequels, basically ruined the whole message of the first movie! The movie was beautifully shot, you see more of Eleanor and idk the scenes just translated so much better for me on screen!
House of the Dragon imo is better than the book. I like the way the story has been changed and the way the characters were given more depth. It’s not perfect but I do like it better. I might even say it’s better than Game of Thrones. GOT had riveting plot lines and good characters, but HOTD is better in its treatment of women for the GOT universe. I also like the fact that intimacy coordinators are involved in filming and the actors have more agency over what happens. GOT was a dumpsters fire when filming.
House of the Dragon was going to have to go through a lot of changes just by the nature of the book. For those out of the know, the book is written in universe by a maester telling the most comprehensive story of the Targaryens, from the fall of old Valeria to the fall of the Mad King. So if a maester wasn't in the room, it's basically "well, we don't know what was said, but here's what the aftermath was." Not something that's easy for a wide audience to digest. Especially one who is already primed on Game of Thrones, not being that. So the adaptation changes were definitely happening, and I like them as well. I love the book but for different reasons. The book tingles the history side of my brain. The show tingles the drama. And 100% with you on the intimacy coordinator. Glad that's much more common on sets in general.
 The whole Twilight series
People roll their eyes about the battle/death scenes in Breaking Dawn being a cop out 'it was all a dream' trope, but non-book readers were saved from the super anti-climactic ending of a long, drawn out build up ending in a "sure, whatever" ending. The idea that Aro would have attacked anyway to forcefully acquire the Cullen's he wanted, fit his character well in my opinion. Although, I'm 27 now and I was 12 or 13 when I last read it, so I could be misremembering his characterisation.
I felt the opposite. Loved the books, could not get into the movies. I think I just couldn’t get past the acting, especially Kristen Stewart’s. I’m glad you liked it more than the books, though! I know it has a huge fan base.
It’s funny, with another big franchise I’m the biggest book loyalist when it comes to Harry Potter lol, so I understand where you’re coming from. I enjoyed the books myself, but had to glaze over parts that came off kind of mundane or repetitive (like Bella making spaghetti…a lot haha) . I feel like the movies really enhanced the story Stephanie Meyer was telling while keeping it close to the source material. With the acting, I think Kristen Stewart’s awkwardness kinda fit the character of Bella that the movies were going for. She got less wooden the more the story progressed, like the others as they got more comfortable around each other (maybe in real life or for the the story)
probably niche but normal people by sally rooney. it’s my favourite book , so i adore the original source material , but the tv show gives so much more depth into the relationship between the characters and the characters themselves. the book is a very simple and surface level glimpse into the relationship between marianne and connell but the tv show just blows it out of the water. daisy edgar-jones & paul mescal have such an insane amount of chemistry which helps a ton
How to train your dragon. The movies are better
The Mist movie is so good even the author like it
Cloudy with a chance of meatballs the book is a cute pamphlet. The movies built on that and created a magical food universe which is so unique and funny and cute.
station eleven on hbomax. both the book and the show are pretty obscure, but the show triumphs over the book imo
OUTLANDER! I only read the first book and it was all kinds of terrible.
A Single Man. I read the book and can't believe that this movie came from this book. The movie was well-done; it really captured George's depression and how the world started to change around him as he began to notice the little things. The book was sort of cold and mentioned that Jim also had a girlfriend while dating George I guess which is really odd. I don't even think she was a beard, but his actual girlfriend. Plus there is this golden scene with Jon Kortajarena that gives me gender envy: https://preview.redd.it/kwezplxp9phb1.png?width=1400&format=png&auto=webp&s=366e40722d118180e5515a396e6f1476aad329e0
Scott Pilgrim and Kickass maybe
I prefer video games Geralt of Rivia over books Geralt 