FabSwingers.com forum: Books better than the movie

By *ollypop9 OP Woman
over a year ago

wouldn't you like to know

I thought switching around.

Which books are better than the movie ?

Ps.i love you - Dont like the movie, loved the book.

As much as 50 shades is junk. The books were better than the movies, funnier.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *storumCouple
over a year ago

PORTADOWN

The Eragon movie is a disgrace to the books.

Went to see it on release day and I'm still bitter.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

All of them?

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ollypop9 OP Woman
over a year ago

wouldn't you like to know

"All of them?"

You actually got a point.

So far any book I read, the movies were maybe close, but never just as good as the book.

Some were just real disappointments altogether.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *otmy1strodeoCouple
over a year ago

Lisburn

The Beach....... Book was much better than the movie I thought

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *og-ManMan
over a year ago

somewhere

I find Stephen King novels to be great and real page turners and then some of the films based on them aren't very good when only compared to the book

They're not bad films in themselves

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ulu00Woman
over a year ago

Donegal

Only film I ever thought was better than the book was the Green Mile

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ocbrownMan
over a year ago

Kilkenny/Waterford

Jurassic Park

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

American sniper book is a million times better than the film. But the film was good aswell

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *dfabMan
over a year ago

Dunboyne

Red Dragon.

Only book that ever madee literally jump!

Neither of the movie adaptations did.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The Hobbit

Watership Down

The Witches (pretty much all of Roald Dahl I'd say)

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *asual777Man
over a year ago

i travel all over

Whilst I liked both immensely I thought normal people was a fair bit better in print form .

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Whilst I liked both immensely I thought normal people was a fair bit better in print form .

Agreed

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ancylaceloverTV/TS
over a year ago

Limerick

[Removed by poster at 01/11/21 11:28:59]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ancylaceloverTV/TS
over a year ago

Limerick

The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit are way better than the movies

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *onnrodMan
over a year ago

moira

Lee Childs Jack Reacher books are a good read, but never would I have pictured Tom Cruise in the title role. Ruins the films for me.

Book Reacher - 6'5" 250lbs fair haired wrecking machine.

Film Reacher - 5'8" midget, scientology loving narcissist....

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Any one one prefer to read the bible or watch the movie lol ha ha no I e will ever say the book is better than the movie lol

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ungry CatCouple
over a year ago

Belfast

"All of them?"

I've yet to read a single book that is worse than a movie

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"All of them?

I've yet to read a single book that is worse than a movie "

I actually posted in the other thread right after I posted that...

The expiriance of Jurassic Park in the cinema as a kid is something reading the book didn't come close to

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"All of them?

I've yet to read a single book that is worse than a movie

I actually posted in the other thread right after I posted that...

The expiriance of Jurassic Park in the cinema as a kid is something reading the book didn't come close to "

Bang on.

Michael Crichton wasn't the greatest writer but his books always adapted well to movies.

He was a good ideas man, but it took more talented people to do them justice I think.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *Belfast_FellaMan
over a year ago

belfast

[Removed by poster at 01/11/21 15:51:53]

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *Belfast_FellaMan
over a year ago

belfast

I totally misread the title and posted films that were better than the books.

Most books are better, IMHO; offhand, I'd suggest any of the Grisham books, any James Elroy (LA Confidential is a great film, but the book is even better) and the Jack Reacher books.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Ready Player One was the biggest difference in quality

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I’m a bit of a sci fi fan and always find that the books from Star Trek are way better.

Other than that I find the James Bond novels are brilliant and sometimes way different to the movies.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Other than that I find the James Bond novels are brilliant and sometimes way different to the movies. "

I read the first two Bond novels recently (Casino Royale and Let and Let Die) and was surprised how grounded they were.

The most unbelievable thing about them was how physically fit Bond was, when in reality he'd be crippled with dodgy lungs, liver and a host of STDs from his particular lifestyle

I think the books got steadily more far-fetched in line with the success of the movies that came out while Fleming was still alive

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *aughty9ieMan
over a year ago

Dublin

the princess bride is an amazing film and i love to bits but the book was just incredible.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Other than that I find the James Bond novels are brilliant and sometimes way different to the movies.

I read the first two Bond novels recently (Casino Royale and Let and Let Die) and was surprised how grounded they were.

The most unbelievable thing about them was how physically fit Bond was, when in reality he'd be crippled with dodgy lungs, liver and a host of STDs from his particular lifestyle

I think the books got steadily more far-fetched in line with the success of the movies that came out while Fleming was still alive"

Yeah I would have to agree with you but the books seem that little more realistic and without the fancy gadgets too.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ratos87Man
over a year ago

Galway

I would say the majority of books are better than the film adaptations. Thats just the way it goes.

But one film springs to mind because it was such a bloody terrible adaptation. Jo Nesbos The Snowman. The Michael Fassbender film adaptation honestly shouldn't have even had to say "Based on the book" in the credits because it strayed so far from the source material. Absolutely awful film. Avoid at all costs lol

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

Post new Message to Thread