Have you ever liked the movie better then the book it was based on?

by Chloey Hamer Posted 2012/06/26 21:22:27

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	yes	25 votes	53%
	no	21 votes	45%
	Undecided	1 vote	2%

More polls by Chloey Hamer

LeeLee 2012/07/21 02:52:22

no

+1
So far, no.

reply
ehrhornp 2012/07/02 00:34:34

yes

+1
2001 was awesome.

reply
Arel 2012/06/28 15:10:46

no

+1
Not yet.

reply
Eyebrowz² 2012/06/28 02:21:51

yes

+1
I usually prefer the book to the movie, but I found that I preferred the movie Fight Club to the book.

reply
Alvin 2012/06/28 01:53:27

no

+1
With the sole possible exception of the movie "Rosemary's Baby" every film I have seen based on a book has been a disgrace to the original author and his.her vision when writing the book. Movie makers have to add sex, violence and trash otherwise they are not happy. Read the book "The Man Who Fell to Earth" then watch the movie and you will see the only thing they have in common is the title. It's a shame David Bowie had to be in that flop.

reply
ehrhornp to Alvin 2012/07/02 00:36:15

+1
I agree. The man who fell to earth ranks with Marooned as being the worst movies ever.

reply
susan BN-0 2012/06/28 01:29:02

no

+1
Books are better.

reply
Jimbo 2012/06/28 00:21:14

yes

+2
One.
I like Fight Club the movie more than the book. I like the book too but the movie is better.

reply
nverumind 2012/06/27 23:16:45

yes

+1
yeah, i know ... im ONE of THOSE people haha.
I tend to find the books more interesting than the movies most of the time.

reply
Tresa 2012/06/27 22:13:48

no

+1
I can't think of one. I do know that some of my favorite movies were based on books.

reply
Mamaknows 2012/06/27 21:46:14

no

+1
They never mesure up.
Like Lord of the Rings trilogy. I LOVE the books and enjoyed the movies (my hubby LOVES the movies) but for me in reading the books and reading about the author and why he wrote the stories....the messages he was imparting make more sense to me. The movies are kinda twisted to push the directors ideals that are not what JR Tolkin was trying to impart and that makes the movies...less.

reply
cmdrbnd007 2012/06/27 21:28:32

yes

+1
I can think of only one instance where I did and that was Patriot Games by Tom Clancy. In the book he saves the Crown Prince who then comes and pays a visit to his house in America. It seemed a little far-fetched to me. In the movie it is a Royal he saves but not someone in line for the crown.

reply
aherbert 2012/06/27 21:27:29

no

+1
To me … the book is always better; I can use my imagination for the characters and scenery.

reply
Jana~ una chica loca 2012/06/27 21:11:44

Undecided

+1
I don't really read books xD

reply
abycinnamon BN-1 2012/06/27 21:02:11

yes

+3
not exactly a movie, but I think the True Blood series on HBO is a ton better than the books were.

reply
India 2012/06/27 20:55:08

no

+1
books are always better

reply
Balladeer-PWCM-POTL 2012/06/27 20:50:42

yes

+2
only ONE example leaps to mind...

reply
J 2012/06/27 20:50:29 (edited)

no

+3
I have been terribly disappointed by the movies many times. I have yet to be disappointed by the book.

Oh, wait. My daddy told me a few years ago to read McMurtry's Lonsome Dove. And while I can't say I didn't like the movie better, I can actually say that one was as good as the other.

reply
Dave Sawyer ♥ Child of God ♥ 2012/06/27 20:47:46

no

+3
Can't think of one. I'm usually disappointed by the things the movie leaves out.

reply
Kimmel 2012/06/27 20:45:42

yes

+1
Just the ones where I hadn't read the book. Ha!

reply
J to Kimmel 2012/06/27 20:56:56

+1
I read a book called "Double Jeopardy" a few years back. It was a real-life suspense story. Then I saw the movie advertised. Without paying any attention, I decided to watch the move - staring Tommy Lee Jones. I was SO disappointed. Not even the same story. In the book, Rebecca Shaffer was murdered by her boyfriend and his "girlfriend". The movie was where a woman was tried and convicted for killing her husband - then wasn't able to be tried again when she really did kill him.

reply
Kimmel to J 2012/06/27 21:05:01

+1
I saw that movie, but didn't read the book. There are movies I have seen and read the book, but they rarely do the book justice. I read "I am Legend" and the movie was quite a bit different.

reply
J to Kimmel 2012/06/28 20:41:35

+1
You'd think with today's technology that any movie could at least compliment the book.

reply
Kat 2012/06/27 20:45:31

yes

+1
based on the Clive Cussler novel, much better movie.

reply
Jack's Pearl 2012/06/27 20:44:25

yes

+2
Only once. I liked the move Fried Green Tomatoes better then the book about it, although the book was good too. But usually I think I enjoy/understand the movie better (which is shortened) because of reading the book. I get all the juicy detail.

reply
themadhare ~IJM 2012/06/27 20:41:53

no

+3
not yet

reply
Bellatrix232 2012/06/27 20:09:39

yes

+2
Generally I think that the movie can never be nearly as good as the book, but I had one exception, Lord of the Rings

reply
Theresa 2012/06/27 13:55:32

no

+2
Always always the book is better!!

reply
AmericanVirus 2012/06/27 01:36:02

yes

+1
Because I don't like to read

reply
Changeling 2012/06/27 01:13:08

yes

+1
Yes. I won't say so I don't get any crap

reply
The Sane One 2012/06/26 21:33:12

yes

+1
Yes, a couple of them.

Stephen King's "It" and Peter Benchley's "Jaws" stand out.

reply
Chewy to The San... 2012/06/26 21:51:50

Yeah...the Jaws film has a life of its own....

reply
KrSpo 2012/06/26 21:27:36

no

+2
Rarely. No way to have a 800 page novel shoved into a 90 to 120 minutes film

reply
Chewy 2012/06/26 21:26:21

no

+2
I started to say "Salem's Lot" but I still liked that book better!

reply