Give examples of times you felt the movies outdid the books.

>>9803500

Tarkovsky's 'Stalker'.

>>9803500
2001 A Space Odyssey
Malcolm X
1984 (loved the book but John Hurt x Eurythmics makes me cum)
The Handmaiden (adapted from Fingersmith which is OK but Park Chan Wook is a master of his craft)
The Martian also made for a more enjoyable movie than it made for a book. Maybe not the best example but I'd rather rewatch the movie than re-read the book.

Kurosawa and Hitchcock's earlier adaptations were mostly based on pulpy novels that were cheap to get the rights to and those films are remembered more than the original source material is (i.e. Kurosawa's Stray Dog).

I'm torn on Cloud Atlas. I think the movie is great pulpy fun but I feel the book has a lot more to offer.

Pynchon's Inherent Vice and Paul Thomas Anderson's Inherent Vice, imo, are on par with each other.

Also I think I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream made for a better video game than a short story. I love the short story but it was fascinating to see those characters have personalities and backstories in the video game. Harlan can shit on it all he wants but he still played an enjoyably misanthropic AM.

>>9803519
I am a huge Paul Thomas Anderson fan, but he messed up Inherent Vice.
Pyncon's book is much better

while i prefer the book, A Clockwork Orange does capture the vibe of it really well

>>9803500
No Country For Old Men. The book is already pretty damn great, but the movie is just perfection.

>>9803526
Same. Adore him but he fucked up. What's truly beautiful and emotive about Pynchon simply is not in the movie, and without that it's just a stoner comedy with actors with mediocre comedic timing.

>>9803500
I'm a sucker for the Les Miserables musical adaptations but I also love the original novel.

Clearly the novel is better but I can't help but love the musical and I can't help but think it's probably one of the best adaptations of a literary work into a musical with another exception being West Side Story.

>>9803539
Yeah, It has some great songs.

The Passion of the Christ

The Unbearable Lightness of Being

Apocalypse Now.

The Handmaiden beats the shit out of Fingersmith.

>>9803500
The Shining

>>9803500
>For example Cloud Atlas.
This is a joke right?

My answer is Children of Men

Forest Gump is one of the worst books ever written. Sometimes I think Robert Zemeckis went to the library and asked some middle aged woman "what are some feelgood books about retards" and went with the first one on the pile. The absolute trash quality of the source material makes it probably the best novel to film ever.

Silence of the Lambs, Godfather and Barry Lyndon are all way better than their books too.

File: hqdefault.jpg (35KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 480x360px

close call but anyway

>>9803783
I haven't read the book, but that's a great flick. It still bothered me that they didn't cast a Japanese actress for Hideko and get that Fujiwara impostor a better language trainer, those gook accents were really terrible.
I'm pretty sure most Kubrick adaptations are better than the books and one might argue that his Lolita works better than Nabokov's screenplay. It's been a while, so I don't feel too confident about it, but that was my impression when I read it. The book however is better than the film.
Teshigahara's adaptations of Abe are good. Does anybody know how Ozu/Kon/Kobayashi adaptations compare to the source material?

>>9803533
the film is missing an entire third of the book (part 3) and entirely misses the point of the book

>>9803879
silence of the lambs book is absolutely incredible. so many details that are not possible to fit into a film.

A Single Man, but not by much.

File: 1425716143805.jpg (398KB, 2112x1188px) Image search: [Google]

398KB, 2112x1188px

Dick's prose, especially his dialogue, is laughably bad at times (exception: Frek's suicide attempt, which was wisely adapted very closely). Nonlinear Texas Weed Man did a much better job at conveying the story. Visual choice was bold but perfect.

>>9803920
Actually, it is missing the last chapter from the third part, the 21st chapter:

Part 1 - 7 chapters being free, violent, and refusing social conditioning.
Part 2 - 7 chapters being incarcerated and conditioned.
Part 3 - 7 chapters free again, but conditioned.

That makes 21 chapters, the age Alex was supposed to be by the end of the book. Kubrick, of course, took major liberties with Burgess' story, but he totally left out the 7th chapter from the third part. Spoiler alert: Burgess offers a sort of resolve to his story. Kubrick iced out that bit of resolve and decided to leave you with a nastier sort of ending. If you haven't read that 21st chapter, it will really surprise you.

>>9804020
I like the movie ending better.

>>9803774
I can only disagree.

File: 51P1c42DyLL.jpg (38KB, 324x500px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 324x500px

Hamilton :)))

>>9803500
That book was good the film was dogshit