Yeah, but in general their solo work after the breakup was kinda lame (WITH EXCEPTIONS! AAAAAHH!) so there must have been something there. I have to wonder why nobody talks about musicians in the "Other Writers" area. I mean, they write too, don't they?

Okay, so I agree with Shawshank Redemption - that movie is one of those movies that people can watch again and again and never get bored (mostly because if you're watching tv, chances are TNT is showing it).

LOTR - I couldn't get into the books because of all the description. I'm not big on huge paragraphs describing things. The movies have been good, but I'm hesitant to say which is better due to never having finished the books.

I like Virgina Woolf - so, Orlando the movie and Orlando the book are tied for me, as well.

What about The Hours, though? I think the movie did a VERY good job with the book, and I'd be hard pressed to say which is better. What does everybody else think about that?

// The lessons that you taught me, I learned were never true //

// What's the point in ever trying, nothing's changing anyway //

// Nothing comes for free //

I'm thinking The Prestige. Loved the movie, haven't seen the book, but even the author Christopher Priest was impressed by the movie.

I agree with Interview with the Vampire, not sure about Hannibal.

The Man in the Iron Mask. by leaps and bounds that would make even Superman envious.

the 10 commandments.

I've picked up a new habit of seeing movies first and then reading the book they're based on.

But, I have to say, that The Diving Bell and the Butterfly is equally brilliant in either form. It's strange because it's not a strict adaptation of the memoir, things get rearranged, characters added, etc. etc. but it feels true, and I kind of liked it better, although I can't explain why.

And of course, there's No Country For Old Men which I was surprised to find was almost exactly the book. And the movie's great. (I'm not sure about the book because I can't judge it on it's own merits.)

quote:

Originally posted by lurkergrrl:
I've picked up a new habit of seeing movies first and then reading the book they're based on.

I insist on that. keeps the book from ruining any possibility that I'd enjoy the movie, as it almost invariably would.

I agree. Worst case, you watch a movie and love it, then put down the book two chapters in because it is mind numbingly boring.


The Princess Bride by William Goldman.

wait - so are you saying The Princess Bride is better as a movie or as a book?

woah. you cannot make that claim about either the movie OR the book.

just can't, dude.

i can! I'm going for the movie. As a movie, it's just wonderful... as a book, it's just damn good.

I meant the movies was better. The book was awesome, but somehow the movie brought forth the story even better than my imagination.

yeah, for me i found the framing device in the film wonderful and warm (thanks to Columbo) while in the book the clever clever self referentiality was a little intrusive... It was still a good read, but i was more aware of the author than i generally like to be.

when I loaned that to my Sister-woman and her husband, they were half-convinced that there really was a Florin and Gelder. *facepalm*

Should I be ashamed to admit that when I read the book I thought the same thing? Does it help to know that I was about 15-ish at the time?


I am seriously gullible.

a fifteen-year-old can be excused from such nonsense. Sister-Woman, however, was 21 at the time, and her husband is, what...26? maybe 27. there's no excuse for them.

American Psycho, and I agree with LOTR. The books were so boring to me.

It's been mentioned, but The Shawshank Redemption is equal (perhaps better... I can't decide) than it's source: Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption. Frank Darabont has done great work with King's material. Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption was one King's greatest. Along with It, I'd call it one of his masterpieces. The movie is worth checking out. They changed some minor stuff, but other wise it's really faithful. And who needs faithful? It's not as if being faithful automatically means "good". If I had to choose, I don't know what I'd come up with, but while the story's a quick read, there's something appealing about seeing the same thing without having to do any work (flipping those pages... tough).

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Mw/NNrules,

I liked James and the Giant Peach as a movie. Fun novel, but in its translation to screen and conversion into a musical I think it gained something (and lost some useless characters that no one noticed missing).

300, I think.