Get Premium
Dark mode theme is available exclusively for premium users. Learn more about the benefits of subscribing.
No fees, cancel anytime.
Dark Mode 
No fees, cancel anytime 
then open in external browser
and click "Open in External Browser" 
Adapting a book to the screen is quite a challenge. Cut a scene, and critics might accuse you of ruining the narrative. Alter a character, and you risk alienating fans. But if done right, it's truly impressive.
There's a whole discussion on Reddit where people have been sharing rare examples of filmmakers surpassing the source material with their cinematic vision. From cult classics such as American Psycho to more recent productions like I’m Thinking of Ending Things, here are the movies that audiences believe are actually better than the book.
This post may include affiliate links.
#1
Carrie. It was Kings first book and, although good, there was emotion and depth in Sissy Spacek’s portrayal that went far beyond the character in the orig story.
RELATED:
#3
Godfather.
The book was obviously a best seller but it had some really - REALLY — cringe side plots (involving huge d***s and huge vags; Puzo seems to have had a fetish about outsized sex organs) which Coppola wisely dropped in the film.
Christopher Crockett 1 year ago
I love seeing Vito playing with the young cat. He's this ruthless mob boss yet he can enjoy the antics of an innocent creature. I also love that the cat just wandered in and Brando picked it up and started playing with it. The cat wasn't in the script!
#4
Forrest Gump. The book was … something.
Manic Mama 1 year ago
100% agree. The book was incredibly incredibly awful. And a complete waste of time.
#5
Shawshank Redemption is a great movie. Book is good, as well.
Somebodys grandmother 1 year ago
No way! In the book the main carakter is cold distant and introvert... Tim Robbins is not that in the mowie. But I LOVE both! The book and the film give very different impressions...
#6
Jaws, in my opinion. The book is not bad, don’t get me wrong, but the characters in it are extremely unlikeable. I think Spielberg was right to eliminate some of the subplots and to buff the characters up to be more likable/relatable. Also, the end of the book kinda sucked. I won’t spoil it, but compared to the movie it’s extremely anti-climatic.
I still like both, the book is still a very good read and I understand why it was such a phenomenon, but I’ll always say the movie was better.
#8
How to train your dragon franchise.
Pan Narrans 1 year ago
Yup. I tried the books after the movies and that was an enormous letdown.
#9
Who Framed(Censored) Roger Rabbit.
The books plot is very different, and the characters are all unlikeable. Eddie isn't a tragic character who's dealing with his brothers death by drinking his life away and alienating all the toons he used to befriend. He's a hard bitten, hard drinking a*****e just because. Roger is dead, and the character who k*lled him doesn't really make any sense. The producers of the movie took the idea of a world with toons and humans and threw away the plot. They made the right choice; the movie turned out amazing.
Michael Largey 1 year ago
The plot for "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" is based on an unused script for a second "Chinatown" sequel.
#10
Stand By Me (based on Stephen King’s “The Body”)… I loved the book too! But the movie is a classic to me, just perfect rendition.
Seonag Udell 1 year ago
Same principle as Shawshank it's a novella and in the same collection too. Different seasons
#11
Goodfellas (based on the novel Wiseguy by Nicholas Pileggi). Wiseguy is actually pretty interesting, it’s basically Henry Hill telling his own story. But Goodfellas is a masterpiece.
#12
American Psycho.
The book really goes deep into Patrick's obsession with fashion and dining culture. It gets a little tedious.
rorschach-penguin 1 year ago
The book is not meant to be an easy read like Harry Potter. A lot is being said in Patrick's various obsessive tirades. It puts you a lot deeper into his chilling view of himself and humanity.
#13
MASH. it was a mediocre novel, but one heck of a movie and a very good TV series.
Michael Largey 1 year ago
Even the author of the novel M*A*S*H said the movie was much better.
#14
The Martian.
The book was excellent, but after a while Mark Watney started to feel like Wile E Coyote with things constantly falling on him. The movie kept just the right amount of adversity to keep the story moving along and never got too bogged down in the details the way the book sometimes did.
#15
Jurassic Park is a good book, but an all-time great movie.
Upstaged75 1 year ago
I actually like both movie and book equally for different reasons. The book has lots of interesting details, but the movie had just the right amount of tension and suspense. Probably one of the only times I've screamed out loud in a movie theater. (When the raptor bursts through the wall at Ellie) Spoiler: Malcolm and Hammond die in the book. Hammond falls and can't get up, then gets eaten by a pack of Compys. (the little dinos)
#16
The Children of Men. Book was good. Movie is top 20 all time.
#17
Matilda. Danny DeVito k*lled it.
rullyman 1 year ago
Disagree. Maybe this is a cultural thing. I'm from the UK and Roald Dahl is a national treasure here... his work feels very British. I hated the American adaptation when I was a child. It didn't feel right at all. As an adult I can appreciate the cast and the work that went into it, but culturally it still doesn't feel like Dahl's books felt to me.
#18
No Country For Old Men is the best literal film representation of any book I’ve ever read. Both are masterpieces.
#19
I am an avid Stephen King fan, but I have to admit, the movie version of **The Shining** was very good, and better IMO than the book. However, in most cases SK's books are much better than the movies / shows / miniseries.
#21
Shrek.
#22
The top answer should be "Paddington."
That movie had no business being as good as it is. The sequel too. Brings that bear to life like no book could.
#23
Casino Royale - the improved Felix Leiter character makes it infinitely more interesting, buttressed by an amazing performance from Jeffrey Wright.
First Blood - the book is just violence p*rn.
LOTR - ok I know this one is going to p**s a lot of people off. Tolkien never intended to write a story in the way we think of a novel/movie. I get that. He did what he was going for very well. But I find the movies more enjoyable. Sue me. That said, The Hobbit movies are garbage. Peter Jackson reached George Lucasian heights in making a prequel trilogy that’s so bad it diminishes the quality of the original. If you don’t have time to read the book and want to see it on screen, watch the Rankin Bass cartoon from the 70s.
#24
The Secret Life of Walter Mitty
The original text is a depressing short story of a guy dreaming of being greater than his actual tedious life. I love that movie even though it isn't terribly popular.
#25
The Mist. The book is better for most of it, but the ending in the movie knocks the socks off the book ending.
Cat Chat 1 year ago
Steven King said the way he wrote the ending, the main character (the dad) suggested the movie's ending is something he might potentially do. Pay attention in the book and it's there. I also have The Mist as a Stereo Sound Dramatization. It's awesome. It sounds like you are in the middle of all the action and, if you use headphones or stereo speakers, you only hear certain sounds only one or the other side. It's one of my favorite King short stories.
#27
Stardust
Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day.
#28
Coraline. The book was all right, but the movie was iconic.
rullyman 1 year ago
While Laika studios does amazing animation, the tone of the film was so different to the book. I much preferred the book. It felt creepier, and Coraline was all alone, except for the cat, who was impossible to rely on. In the film they added that random boy, who was totally unnecessary, and they ramped up the action, which changed the tone a lot.
#29
Both Fight Club and LA Confidential are much better movies than books.
Sometimes taking a second pass through the narrative to tighten it up for a two hour movie can tighten up the mistakes.
#30
I feel like a lot of it depends on the order one reads/watches initially. That said...
I prefer the film *Memoirs of a Geisha* to the book.
And *Howl's Moving Castle*. I didn't like the books at all.
#31
Warms my heart to see so many people listing The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile, and the Jason Bourne series.
Christopher Crockett 1 year ago
I respectfully disagree with the Jason Bourne series. The movies are very good romps of action and conspiracy, but Robert Ludlum just nailed the sense of paranoia and desperation that Bourne experiences, and the transformation from amnesia-ridden victim into vengeance-fueled killer. The movies updated the technology, but put yourself in the recent historical mindset and the books are amazing. The Day of the Jackal is another where the movie and book are both great political thrillers, if you're interested.
#32
The Last of the Mohicans.
#33
I’m Thinking of Ending Things
Really enjoyed the book but didn’t love the ending
The movie goes much bigger and weirder for the finale. The results are unforgettable.
#34
Starship troopers hands down. The movie heavily satirizes the original book. If you like the movie you'll probably find the book deeply distasteful.
EDIT: IDK if some of y'all saw the movie first and read the satire and undermining tone of that and applied it to the book, but the book is NOT great.
It's openly pro-fascist and the movie is so good because of how effectively it lampoons the book. If you read the book as satire more power to you (death of the author and all) but do know that others are aware of the author's intention and interpret praise of the book as praise of the ideology it was produced to support.
#35
Not a movie but The Boys is SIGNIFICANTLY better than the comic. Garth Ennis has some neat ideas but he's kind of a hack.
#37
Misery. Definitely not one of Stephen King's better books, but what a great movie!
#38
The green mile.
Cuppa tea? 1 year ago
Book is better, some - for me crucial - scenes were cut from movie. Still awesome movie.
#40
Dexter the TV series is *much* better than the book series.
T'Mar of Vulcan 1 year ago
Except for the last season. Got bored three episodes in and never bothered with the rest. Also got bored with the sequel series after like two episodes. Meh.
#41
The Rules of Attraction. The book was fine, but the movie had stunning visuals that took it much further. While the script lifted some lines directly from the book, I think the script had better character development and a tighter story.
#42
A little princess. Cuaron’s work was magical.
#43
Blade Runner.
Rinso The Red 1 year ago
This one's almost not fair. Blade Runner is so far from Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep that's it hard to even say it's based on that book.
#48
Gone Girl. The book was made to be a movie and the movie does not disappoint.
Fat Harry (Oi / You) 1 year ago
I was literally disappointed with this movie. I thought the ending was a let down.
What do you think ?
Ace 1 year ago
I think in the majority of cases it really depends on your first exposure. If you're a fan of books then it's very unusual that a film will improve upon it - as a film buff who later reads the book you're nearly always going to be disappointed. And of course a lot of "books of the film" were written later, so have ne real integrity or value.
Moosy Girl 1 year ago
I rarely have this, unless the adaptation is offensively terrible. The recent The Watch tv series is an example (for me) of something that is already just bad becoming insultingly bad knowing what it’s ‘inspired by’. But usually I’m pretty good at letting books and movies just be their own thing and liking both. Sometimes I wonder if it’s because I have no imagination of my own that I can accept adaptations pretty easily.
Load More Replies...
xolitaire 1 year ago
12 monkeys. The movie is great, but the book portrays the absurdity of the situation and the stress the main character is under much better.
Marnie 1 year ago
Oooh. Never knew this was based on a book. It's one of the few actual Sci Fi movies out there. (So much so-called Sci Fi is not Sci Fi.) I'll have to read that one.
Load More Replies...
Chan Sue Lynn 1 year ago (edited)
Legally Blonde. I love the main character in the movie. The novel....not so much.
Guess Undheit 1 year ago
"In The Heat Of The Night". Sidney Poitier and Rod Steiger's relationship is much more believable than the book. (Why would a deputy work with an out of town cop, not the sheriff?) And the intensity of their performances made it an all time great. Plus, the plot of the murder is much more believable than the second tier novel it's based on.
Kate 1 year ago
Holes and Stardust Both are on my all-time favourites list. (But after I read the Stardust book I was like... what's this piece of...?)
rullyman 1 year ago
Really? I enjoyed the book. It's not a bad work at all.
Load More Replies...
Kurt Ramsey 1 year ago
Last of the Mohicans. The movie is a classic, I've seen it dozens of time. The farthest I've every made it into the book is page 18 and that was with three seperate attempts.
Nikole 1 year ago
Mark Twain does a hilarious imitation of James Fenimore Cooper’s writing style.
Load More Replies...
Robert Beveridge 1 year ago
How does no one ever remember the single greatest quality gap between book and movie of all time in these lists? The painfully obvious choice is Psycho.
Dame Cherry 1 year ago
How in hell is Lord of The Rings not on here??? The films are so much better than the books
roddy 1 year ago
The Exorcist and The Da Vinci code. Both very badly written. Movies not amazing either, but certainly better.
Nikole 1 year ago
Hard disagree on The Exorcist. I found the book to be far superior.
Load More Replies...
Giles McArdell 1 year ago
A bit old hat but I tried reading the classic "20,000 leagues under the sea", seems like about 70% of it is just describing all the different undersea flora and fauna, deadly boring!
Sophia Athene 1 year ago
I never read a book before watching the movie (unless I've read the book before a movie was made). The reason why is that I enjoy the movie and then turn to the book for more of that world and the characters, to experience and love so much more of it. If I read the book first, I go into the movie with more expectations and usually come away mad b/c it did the book a disservice. Has worked every time but once since I started this rule for myself. Return of the King is my best example. Hadn't read the books before and was so into the film trilogy I couldn't wait a year to know how the story played out. Instead of getting lost in the story and visuals, I'm critiquing the movie as I go. I said I would walk out if 2 things didn't happen and I was anxiously waiting on them: Eowyn and the Witch King and the Eagles returning. Instead of Eowyn surprising the sh!t out of me and me losing my mind over my 2nd fave part in the trilogy, I'm sitting there thinking, "You damn right that's in there."
Aidan Pite 1 year ago
Quest for Camelot. 'Based on' the book The King's Damosel by Vera Chapman. The movie has 100% less rape than the books, the guy doesn't choose death over love, and there's a wisecracking talking dragon thrown in just for funsies.
Joey Jo Jo Shabadoo 1 year ago (edited)
"The Ghost and Mrs Muir". The novel is well-written, but the movie has Rex Harrison and Gene Tierney and thats hard to compete with.
Marnie 1 year ago
Not a movie, but a mini-series. The Queen's Gambit series is one of my favorite shows of all time. The book is just very dry. The series does follow the book quite closely. There were a couple of things I liked better about the book, but overall the series is really marvelous.
SkippityBoppityBoo 1 year ago (edited)
I'm going to stick up for Stephen King, obviously! Cos I've loved his books from an early age! Some of the film adaptations of his books cannot fully show/depict what is in the book. Even if they're filmed as a series. They can't get all the tiny details that Stephen King gets into books. I've read 'Big Driver' in "Full Moon, No Stars" and it's graphic to an extent but I also have the DVD of it. It's about retribution... It's one I'd recommend but be warned as it deals with a pretty horrific assault, violence against a female. Its helped me a lot with dealing with my own stuff... He does deal with female DV and survivor things a lot. As in writes about them. Dolores Claiborne... Rose Madder... And they helped me.... I think a lot of his books are about being in a very bad situation, terrible, horrific but a lot of them are about Survival... And That You Will.
Mariele Scherzinger 1 year ago
Once Were Warriors. A powerful film, based on a very mediocre book.
Ace 1 year ago
I think in the majority of cases it really depends on your first exposure. If you're a fan of books then it's very unusual that a film will improve upon it - as a film buff who later reads the book you're nearly always going to be disappointed. And of course a lot of "books of the film" were written later, so have ne real integrity or value.
Moosy Girl 1 year ago
I rarely have this, unless the adaptation is offensively terrible. The recent The Watch tv series is an example (for me) of something that is already just bad becoming insultingly bad knowing what it’s ‘inspired by’. But usually I’m pretty good at letting books and movies just be their own thing and liking both. Sometimes I wonder if it’s because I have no imagination of my own that I can accept adaptations pretty easily.
Load More Replies... xolitaire 1 year ago
12 monkeys. The movie is great, but the book portrays the absurdity of the situation and the stress the main character is under much better.
Marnie 1 year ago
Oooh. Never knew this was based on a book. It's one of the few actual Sci Fi movies out there. (So much so-called Sci Fi is not Sci Fi.) I'll have to read that one.
Load More Replies... Chan Sue Lynn 1 year ago (edited)
Legally Blonde. I love the main character in the movie. The novel....not so much.
Guess Undheit 1 year ago
"In The Heat Of The Night". Sidney Poitier and Rod Steiger's relationship is much more believable than the book. (Why would a deputy work with an out of town cop, not the sheriff?) And the intensity of their performances made it an all time great. Plus, the plot of the murder is much more believable than the second tier novel it's based on.
Kate 1 year ago
Holes and Stardust Both are on my all-time favourites list. (But after I read the Stardust book I was like... what's this piece of...?)
rullyman 1 year ago
Really? I enjoyed the book. It's not a bad work at all.
Load More Replies... Kurt Ramsey 1 year ago
Last of the Mohicans. The movie is a classic, I've seen it dozens of time. The farthest I've every made it into the book is page 18 and that was with three seperate attempts.
Nikole 1 year ago
Mark Twain does a hilarious imitation of James Fenimore Cooper’s writing style.
Load More Replies... Robert Beveridge 1 year ago
How does no one ever remember the single greatest quality gap between book and movie of all time in these lists? The painfully obvious choice is Psycho.
Dame Cherry 1 year ago
How in hell is Lord of The Rings not on here??? The films are so much better than the books
roddy 1 year ago
The Exorcist and The Da Vinci code. Both very badly written. Movies not amazing either, but certainly better.
Nikole 1 year ago
Hard disagree on The Exorcist. I found the book to be far superior.
Load More Replies... Giles McArdell 1 year ago
A bit old hat but I tried reading the classic "20,000 leagues under the sea", seems like about 70% of it is just describing all the different undersea flora and fauna, deadly boring!
Sophia Athene 1 year ago
I never read a book before watching the movie (unless I've read the book before a movie was made). The reason why is that I enjoy the movie and then turn to the book for more of that world and the characters, to experience and love so much more of it. If I read the book first, I go into the movie with more expectations and usually come away mad b/c it did the book a disservice. Has worked every time but once since I started this rule for myself. Return of the King is my best example. Hadn't read the books before and was so into the film trilogy I couldn't wait a year to know how the story played out. Instead of getting lost in the story and visuals, I'm critiquing the movie as I go. I said I would walk out if 2 things didn't happen and I was anxiously waiting on them: Eowyn and the Witch King and the Eagles returning. Instead of Eowyn surprising the sh!t out of me and me losing my mind over my 2nd fave part in the trilogy, I'm sitting there thinking, "You damn right that's in there."
Aidan Pite 1 year ago
Quest for Camelot. 'Based on' the book The King's Damosel by Vera Chapman. The movie has 100% less rape than the books, the guy doesn't choose death over love, and there's a wisecracking talking dragon thrown in just for funsies.
Joey Jo Jo Shabadoo 1 year ago (edited)
"The Ghost and Mrs Muir". The novel is well-written, but the movie has Rex Harrison and Gene Tierney and thats hard to compete with.
Marnie 1 year ago
Not a movie, but a mini-series. The Queen's Gambit series is one of my favorite shows of all time. The book is just very dry. The series does follow the book quite closely. There were a couple of things I liked better about the book, but overall the series is really marvelous.
SkippityBoppityBoo 1 year ago (edited)
I'm going to stick up for Stephen King, obviously! Cos I've loved his books from an early age! Some of the film adaptations of his books cannot fully show/depict what is in the book. Even if they're filmed as a series. They can't get all the tiny details that Stephen King gets into books. I've read 'Big Driver' in "Full Moon, No Stars" and it's graphic to an extent but I also have the DVD of it. It's about retribution... It's one I'd recommend but be warned as it deals with a pretty horrific assault, violence against a female. Its helped me a lot with dealing with my own stuff... He does deal with female DV and survivor things a lot. As in writes about them. Dolores Claiborne... Rose Madder... And they helped me.... I think a lot of his books are about being in a very bad situation, terrible, horrific but a lot of them are about Survival... And That You Will.
Mariele Scherzinger 1 year ago
Once Were Warriors. A powerful film, based on a very mediocre book.
You May Like 50 Movies Based On Books That Do Justice To The Original Story 50 Underrated Movies Revealed for Your Cinematic Nights 50 Worst Movie Remakes That Should've Never Existed
Linas Simonaitis
Linas Simonaitis
Saimonas Lukošius
Related on Bored Panda
