30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books

It was his first book and he had actually thrown it away. His wife fished it out and convinced him to submit it. I've read the book, it was pretty bad, especially when you compare it to the movie. The idea King had was amazing, but his storytelling at the point was definitely not polished.

Pretty much any Stephen King book is better as a movie. I love the man, but I'm not a fan of his novels. The Stand was excellent for the first 900 pages or so. But those last 40 pages ruined the whole thing.

It is one of the few King books i like. I enjoy the oral history approach he took cutting in interviews and AP news stories. I think the book and movie are pretty much neck and neck for enjoyment... At least in my opinion

Stephen King gets disparaged as an author a lot but look at the films - Green Mile, Stand By Me, Shawshank Redemption... They're all based on Stephen King books/Novellas 🙂

@NTech Solar Thank you for the valuable information!

The Princess Bride movie told the story of Buttercup and Wesley. The Princess Bride book told the story of the adaption of the novel from the original work, and how the abridger cut out "the boring parts." Very meta, whereas the movie was straight fairy tale.

I see Cary Elwes I upvote

The movie was and is still amazing! But if you read the background to the book and then read the book you will find it is also amazing! :)

ABSOLUTELY NOT!!! There was one huge improvement in the movie compared to the book (having Grandpa read the book rather that the quite poor version of the book) but otherwise is was impossible to have the movie be better. The 12 (or so) pages of the sword fight on the cliff episode may have been the best 12 pages I have ever read. Yes, the movie was phenomenal, shockingly good for such a challenging task. But the book was one of the best ever.

I've never read the book. TBH didn't know there was an actual book. But the movie is a gem.

First time I've seen it is d I c k s and not d r u g s

I read the Godfather in my early 20's. It was a very well written book with many intricate but interesting side stories of all Corleone family members and their close ones. I honestly don't recall the mentioning of the huge sexual organs of the characters, but maybe I just didn't pay attention to it? The first and second films (The third is just not even worth mentioning) are brilliant, and they mainly focus on the story of Don Vito and Michael. But the book has sooo much more and so many details and side stories that are very intriguing. The evolution of Michael and Kay's relationship is different in the book, but now that I think about it, I kinda like more the movie twist. Conclusion: both the book and the movies (I and II) are excellent, but the book is richer and more complex. Worth reading.

I was probably 13 when I read The Last Don. The first sex scene just flew over my head. Had to read it again, trying to make any sense, failed.

I love the book, the outsized sexual organs is just a way of exploring their characters differently, and the Johnny Fontain voice issues give a completely different aspect on his character, but you couldn't add it all in the film.

I honestly didn't know this was a book first.

I don't know who read this POS book and thought it would make a good movie, but I'm glad they did. Classic film. The book's sequel is even dumber.

The movie was so schmaltzy

Forrest Gump was a book first? huh I didn't know that.

Worst book I ever read

The original is just a short story (at best a novella): "Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption." I don't think it should be included, since it feels like comparing apples and oranges to say that a short story doesn't have the same depth.

This really should be higher as it was just a short story originally. What they did with the movie became legend in Hollywood.

It’s a short story, not a book

Got both, Love Both! 💜💜💜

'Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption' is a short story from a collection, not a book on its own. I love Stephen King's work, but I did prefer the film in this case.

The only thing I remember about the book was that someone was having an affair with someone. 🤔

Peter Benchley regretted the story because of the way sharks were viewed after the movie came out. It was just a work of fiction, and sharks didn't (don't) deserve the reputation they got based upon that ficticious story.

I'm in full agreement with this one. I read the book less than a month before the movie was released, so the story was fresh in my mind when I saw it. Spielberg (and editor Verna Fields) did a great job of trimming off the unnecessary bits & keeping the suspense going strong. Also, I'd like to thank my mom (sarcasm) for not warning 11-year-old me of the rather graphic s‍e‍x scene in the book (so glad that wasn't in the movie!)

I liked both. Spielberg was right to leave out the mafia and affair subplots for the movie and focus on Brody vs. Bruce, but I really liked the book. Yes, the characters are unlikeable but that's kinda what I like about them. I've read the book many times. I like the description of small-town-by-the-sea and what it has to do to survive. I like Ellen's backstory and how her relationship with Brody evolves. Quint was easily the most unlikeable character so I liked that he got what he deserved. The ending was a bit too similar to Moby D**k though - the movie ending was definitely better.

I think you're being overly generous to the book

I don't understand the reasoning here. So the movie "followed the book almost exactly" - then why is the movie better than the book? Just trying to stick to the name of this article.

I remember getting bored with the book, but the movie was incredible.

They stuffed up Hannibal sequel though, great book but the movie was cringeworthy

The books and movies are extremely different tho, having entirely not the same story

The books and movies are basically telling completely different stories , and the books are aimed at a significantly younger audience than the movies and TV shows

I'm going to recommend the YouTube channel Lost In Adaptation here. I think he covers it pretty well. I found it quite interesting https://youtu.be/2At-59aUSpw?si=KWn9XnV6HOnnyLfX

It's a good thing that people didn't know about the book before they went to see the film!

Another short story.

Nope nope nope! You really do need to read the novella and watch the film! There's so much more detail in Stephen King books that explains a lot of things in some of his film adaptations.

Somehow The Godfather is my favorite movie but I can’t stand Goodfellas. I don’t understand my own taste.