Just a quick disclaimer: just because I'm saying that a certain movie is better than the book does not mean that I'm saying that book is terrible, or that you're stupid if you happen to like the book better. These are purely my own opinions, and you are entitled to yours!
That being said, here are four movies that I personally believe to be better than the books.
1. Mortal Engines
So, I DNFed this book this year, so maybe I don't have the most informed opinion about this. However, my brother (who read the complete novel) tells me he feels the same way, so maybe my opinion is actually valid?
The writing of the book was very hard for me to get into, and I found that some of the character's actions didn't make sense for their personalities (for example, I found Hester's backstory reveal much more convincing in the movie than in the book.) Plus, I feel that the world of Mortal Engines translates much better in film than on page. It's very visual, and so the movie was much more impressive in that sense as well.
However, I do want to complete my read of the book, because I do love the concept, and apparently the book did do a better job with some things, so I'm excited to be able to compare the later chapters with the movie's take on the same events.
2. The Maze Runner
Now, I didn't really enjoy The Maze Runner book at all. For my more in-depth opinions about it, you can check out my review, but basically, I found the characters to be unrelateable and the writing to be too juvenile for my tastes. However, the plot was quite well-paced and engaging, which made the movie adaptation much more enjoyable to watch (though I don't really think it was an incredible movie, just an enjoyable one). Note that I'm only talking about the first movie. The second two have some other problems (which I'm not going to get into here.)
3. The Lord of the Rings
I buried this one in the middle of the post because I'm mildly terrified of voicing my opinion about it. It's a wildly unpopular opinion, and so before you all get mad at me, let me explain. I'm not saying the Lord of the Rings books are bad. On the contrary, they're really, really good. But here's the thing: Tolkien originally wrote the trilogy (it is a trilogy in my opinion, though some like to think of it as one book, which is perfectly okay) as a mythology. It wasn't really meant to be a novel the same way Mistborn: The Final Empire or Eragon were. Tolkien wrote the trilogy as a mythological story of England, in a similar vein as Beowulf or the Norse mythologies.
The movies condense the storyline, remove the unnecessary scenes and characters (such as Tom Bombadil, who, though important to the mythology, was not important to the story of Frodo and the Ring), and also manage to stay true to the original feel of the books as well, which is not something that a lot of movie adaptations do.
4. The Secret of Moonacre
I watched The Secret of Moonacre several times before I even realized it was based on a book (called The Little White Horse), so I am a little biased towards the movie anyway. However, I was really excited to read the book, and so I was disappointed at how different the book was (and not exactly in a good way.) While I did appreciate the Christian themes that were present in the book, I felt that the movie had much better conflict and resolution of that conflict, with characters actually struggling to achieve their goals, which the book didn't really have.
No comments:
Post a Comment