Books that were far different from the movie / tv series.

Chdamn

Chdamn

Dungeon Master
Staff member
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Life Member
Benefactor
Multi-Factor Enabled
Joined
Dec 16, 2016
Messages
70,905
Location
In the Dungeon
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
I listen to audiobooks regularly as I drive a truck all day.

Some of them are repeats of books I’ve already read. Others I find by looking up what book a movie or series was based on.

One of the worst was world war Z. The one only thing they shared was the title.

Most recently I downloaded the Longmire mysteries. OMG are they different. The first season of longmire had some semblance to the books but nothing after that.

What kills me is that the character is so much more relatable in the books. He’s funny as hell and has much more depth. There no great antagonist like there is in the series.

So what else is out there that is vastly different?
 
Solaris. The USA/Soderberg version of the film is a love story, the Russian/Trakovsky version is a kind of a love story with a lot of personal angst, and the book is a deeply introspective pondering of memory and how poorly we understand ourselves as humans. I love each one in their own right.

The Nameless is a pretty half-assed movie attempt of a solid Ramsey Campbell novel.

Pick any Michael Crichton book and you'll have a solid movie that took quite a few liberties with his source material. Congo, Jurassic Park, Andromeda Man, etc. I somewhat enjoy this approach, as having read the book didn't necessarily spoil the movies. For instance, John Hammond is essentially a bad guy in the Jurassic park book.

Harris' Silence of The Lambs is great either way with some differences, but Red Dragon was a hideous attempt at a fantastic read. Manhunter was a surreal 80s attempt before Silence was even made. Tom Noonan carries much of the film, which follows the novel reasonably close, until the end, which seemed rushed.
 
yard mongrel said:
Solaris. The USA/Soderberg version of the film is a love story, the Russian/Trakovsky version is a kind of a love story with a lot of personal angst, and the book is a deeply introspective pondering of memory and how poorly we understand ourselves as humans. I love each one in their own right.

The Nameless is a pretty half-assed movie attempt of a solid Ramsey Campbell novel.

Pick any Michael Crichton book and you'll have a solid movie that took quite a few liberties with his source material. Congo, Jurassic Park, Andromeda Man, etc. I somewhat enjoy this approach, as having read the book didn't necessarily spoil the movies. For instance, John Hammond is essentially a bad guy in the Jurassic park book.

Harris' Silence of The Lambs is great either way with some differences, but Red Dragon was a hideous attempt at a fantastic read. Manhunter was a surreal 80s attempt before Silence was even made. Tom Noonan carries much of the film, which follows the novel reasonably close, until the end, which seemed rushed.
Click to expand...
Damn. You didn’t mention how different the ending of Hannibal was in the books. Talk about a complete 180.
 
Chuckman said:
Movies that differed from the book?

Almost all of them.....

Jaws, Horse Soldiers, 13 Hours, The Canine Mutiny, We We're Soldiers, all of Tom Clancy....
Click to expand...

Yeah they all differ. I’m talking about the ones that are completely different.
 
Chdamn said:
One of the worst was world war Z. The one only thing they shared was the title.
Click to expand...
1645976084922.png
.EC. said:
Starship Troopers.
Click to expand...
I think they had a scifi script license and the book adaptation license and tried to cram the two together. and they gave it to a director who has confirmed he hated the ideas in the book, never finished reading it, and tried to cram nazi imagery in because he hated everything about it so much.
 
DrScaryGuy said:
View attachment 443412

I think they had a scifi script license and the book adaptation license and tried to cram the two together. and they gave it to a director who has confirmed he hated the ideas in the book, never finished reading it, and tried to cram nazi imagery in because he hated everything about it so much.
Click to expand...
Nothing says you can’t enjoy both in their separate light.

When I’m looking for a new book I usually think of a movie or tv series I enjoyed and then look for the book.

I enjoyed the movie starship troopers. I liked the tv series longmire. I liked WWZ.

Then I read the books as was shocked by how absolutely different they were.

It’s much harder to go the other way. If you really like a book and then watch a movie that is completely different than the book you usually hate it.
 
Last edited:
Eragon was really different. I loved that book series growing up, but the movie absolutely sucked.
 
Goofyfoot2001 said:
Do you mean the book called the Caine Mutiny or A Bird in the Deep the true story of the USS Partridge"?
Click to expand...
The Caine Mutiny

Bogart did a great job playing the captain, but the movie sucked as far as the other characters to me.
 
I read WWZ and still liked the movie. As somebody once said movies work differently than books and you simply can not turn a book into a movie and it looks 100% like the book.
 
johnnyb said:
The Dark Tower
Click to expand...
Oh, dont get me started on the King movies.
I read so much King growing up and after watching butchered attempts at Cujo, Christine, The Dead Zone and Firestarter, I quit watching the movies period. Never even tried to watch It, Pet Cemetary, Dark Tower, Misery, Running Man, The Dark Half, Thinner, Apt Pupil, etc.
Shawshank was the only King adaptation that was a decent movie.


Oh, and as to tbe question in the OP...got nothing. I dont watch a movie made from a book Ive read. See above lol.
 
Last edited:
I never saw The Dark Tower when it came out, but having read the book I absolutely cannot fathom how anybody thought they could turn it into a movie.

There's just so much NOT said in the book which the reader picks up on that I just can't see how it's effectively translateable anything near like in the book.

Apparently it didn't do well, either, which didn't shock me.

By the way... the first several books are awesome, but the last couple SUCKED.
 
I read a lot...and what movies I see tend to fall into two main categories (scifi and action).

The movies I don't see generally fall into genres I'm not interested in, movies I'd like to see but which fail to capture my attention in their trailers, and movies I'd like to see if only I had the time.

I rarely accept movie critic's opinions on whether a movie is good or bad, because quite frankly a lot of them suck at reviews. One of my brothers told me many years ago that he and his wife chose which movies they saw by what Siskel and Ebert gave a thumbs down to.

HOWEVER... some people's reviews/opinions are truly hilarious! Like this lady's review of some chick flick called "The Girl on the Train":

"They didn't do a good job of just explaining anything. If I hadn't read the book it would have flown right over me that Rachel got cheated on, and that Anna was the other woman. I could write a book about what a horrible job they did with this movie but I'm afraid they would try to turn that book into a movie and butcher it too." —amandan4979829b3
 
Just to flip this, one movie that I found to have done a fair job vis-a-vis the original (although the novel was superior, particularly in the plotting/planning/countermeasures insights) is Day of the Jackal (1973).
 
Last edited:
Any book series that has more than 5 books will be butchered by TV/Film.
I agree with you about Longmire, they just didn’t capture the depth of the character that the books portrayed. Much like the Jack Reacher books.
The Bosch series of books and the TV series. I loved the books, the show just doesn’t follow and I usually end up falling asleep watching it.
 
GreatGazoo said:
Just to flip this, one movie that I found to have done a fair job vis-a-vis the original (although the novel was superior, particularly in the plotting/planning/countermeasures insights) is Day of the Jackal (1973).
Click to expand...
Count of minute Cristo movie is better than the book, both the Gerard Depardieu and the Jim Caviezel version.
The book was written weekly in a magazine, and you can tell when he forgets plot points, the movie much more narratively compact.

Bourne identity book gets a bit wonky with its descriptions of karate chops, amnesia, and the relationship with his girlfriend. Movie, imo, does ir better.
 
RetiredUSNChief said:
I read a lot...and what movies I see tend to fall into two main categories (scifi and action).

The movies I don't see generally fall into genres I'm not interested in, movies I'd like to see but which fail to capture my attention in their trailers, and movies I'd like to see if only I had the time.

I rarely accept movie critic's opinions on whether a movie is good or bad, because quite frankly a lot of them suck at reviews. One of my brothers told me many years ago that he and his wife chose which movies they saw by what Siskel and Ebert gave a thumbs down to.

HOWEVER... some people's reviews/opinions are truly hilarious! Like this lady's review of some chick flick called "The Girl on the Train":

"They didn't do a good job of just explaining anything. If I hadn't read the book it would have flown right over me that Rachel got cheated on, and that Anna was the other woman. I could write a book about what a horrible job they did with this movie but I'm afraid they would try to turn that book into a movie and butcher it too." —amandan4979829b3
Click to expand...
My wife and I pick movies the same way. If critics think it is great then it probably sucks. Another way to almost guarantee a movie will suck is when they try to cram in too many bug name actors.
 
NCMedic said:
Any book series that has more than 5 books will be butchered by TV/Film.
I agree with you about Longmire, they just didn’t capture the depth of the character that the books portrayed. Much like the Jack Reacher books.
The Bosch series of books and the TV series. I loved the books, the show just doesn’t follow and I usually end up falling asleep watching it.
Click to expand...
i feel like the new prime series did a better job at portraying Reacher.
 
johnnyb said:
The Dark Tower
Click to expand...
The movie was stupid. The "Gunslinger" part of the series was left out. And I agree that the last 4 books in the series lost me.

Another series that did not work in movie form is the Ann Rice vampire series. "Interview with a Vampire" was awful, despite Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt. "Lestat" was worse.
 
Yeah, I had forgotten the ann Rice vampire books! I read those in deployment and thoroughly enjoyed them. By the movies sucked badly.

I also read Brian Lumley's Necroscope series on deployment. I hope to God they don't try to make movies out of them because I'm sure they'll screw those up too.
 
Miss Lily said:
The movie was stupid. The "Gunslinger" part of the series was left out. And I agree that the last 4 books in the series lost me.

Another series that did not work in movie form is the Ann Rice vampire series. "Interview with a Vampire" was awful, despite Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt. "Lestat" was worse.
Click to expand...
I’ve read several (most maybe) of the Vampire Chronicles, and while I didn’t watch Lestat, I enjoyed Interview lol. But I may have seen the movie before I read the book. Like someone posted earlier if I watch the movie then read the book I tend to not compare the two. Reading the books then watching the movie the movie never “lives up”.

I will say, through the first few books/seasons, the series Game of Thrones did good staying close. It went off the rails when they ran out of source material and per the show runners and GRRM they just had an “outline” of the rest of the series
 
Chdamn said:
I listen to audiobooks regularly as I drive a truck all day.

Some of them are repeats of books I’ve already read. Others I find by looking up what book a movie or series was based on.

One of the worst was world war Z. The one only thing they shared was the title.

Most recently I downloaded the Longmire mysteries. OMG are they different. The first season of longmire had some semblance to the books but nothing after that.

What kills me is that the character is so much more relatable in the books. He’s funny as hell and has much more depth. There no great antagonist like there is in the series.

So what else is out there that is vastly different?
Click to expand...
Swiss Family Robinson and Robinson Crusoe have been heavily pc edited.
 
Logan’s Run
while the book and the movie shared the theme of the Time Crystal on your hand and aging out the details were so different between the book and the movie.. if they had stayed closer to the book it would’ve been a better movie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom