Remove ads

The Movie Was Better

Isn't the Godfather the shining example of this?

The book was an entertaining, pulpy crime novel that has all sorts of weird and squicky digressions (that woman Sonny has sex with in the beginning at the wedding has this whole sideplot in the book about trying to deal with her giant vagina, which only Sonny's giant dick could pleasure) and strange weird syntax and diction, like describing people as having 'cherubic' faces.

The movie, on the other hand, is in serious contention for best movie of all time.
 
Last edited:
Lunatic350 said:
Captain America: Civil War is a far better story than the Civil War crossover it is adapting from the comics.

Similarly, Logan is a very, very, very loose adaptation of Old Man Logan apparently (even though Logan but old and bitter and the world is shittier is really all it takes from that story) and Logan is goddamn fantastic, while OML is a shitty edgelord mini whose only real positives are a strong sense of style and being the basis for the MC of the Old Man Logan ongoing which was also really damn good.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Its a better told story but I do feel the adaptation missed out on some of the most important bits (IMO) to the comic. In the movie the registration act would affect... little over a dozen people (not counting agents of shield) where as in the comics the law would apply to hundreds of people one way or another. There was a much larger scope and weight that I feel was lost when its range is reduced to such a small crowd.
 
I'll take a smaller scope well told story over a broader story with pointless deaths for drama, butchering of characters(I am not sure whose's character got butchered worse, Iron Man, Captain America or Mara Hill) and general stupidity like the negative zone prison.

Admittedly though I think it was pointed out somewhere that the comic's superhero registration was pretty much an natural logical extension of the mutant registration act though why mutants were hated but people like the fantastic four and other heroes weren't never really made much sense.
 
While Civil Way the film was far better than the original comics (and worse than the mightygodking edit) it still wasn't very good imo.

Also the MGK version makes for a way better canon
 
Mutton said:
While Civil Way the film was far better than the original comics (and worse than the mightygodking edit) it still wasn't very good imo.

Also the MGK version makes for a way better canon
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
MightyGodKing edit?
TBH after TLJ I'm leery of fan edits
 
Alex said:
Its a better told story but I do feel the adaptation missed out on some of the most important bits (IMO) to the comic. In the movie the registration act would affect... little over a dozen people (not counting agents of shield) where as in the comics the law would apply to hundreds of people one way or another. There was a much larger scope and weight that I feel was lost when its range is reduced to such a small crowd.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Scope in and of itself is net neutral with regards to quality.

I don't think a version of Civil War's film with a wider scope would have been any better than what we got. A wider scope film likely wouldn't have had that final showdown from Civil War, for example, and that's one of the best sequences in the MCU to date.
 
I'd say The Princess Bride is probably a bit better then it's book if only because it's more focused without the 'edited manuscript' jokes.

That being said, the two of them actually compliment each other and I'd recommend doing one, the other then the original again.
 
i didn't like the movie Civil War because it's not even about ethics in superheroes. It's about Steve and Tony having a slap fight as Steve was always in the right from start to finish and the final battle is just a battle over their personal problems.
 
I like the anime (movie) version of To Aru Hikuushi e no Tsuioku (Remembrances of A Certain Pilot, released by NIS America as The Princess and the Pilot) more then the original light novel. The movie version was less grim and cut out some creepy stuff and otaku bs as well as some content that was simply unnecessary and would have slowed down the movie's pacing.

I do have to admit the novel explains some things better then the movie, but I actually like the show don't tell approach the movie adopts after it gets the initial exposition out of the way, even if that approach sometimes leaves it vulnerable to nitpicking.
 
Nikkolas said:
i didn't like the movie Civil War because it's not even about ethics in superheroes. It's about Steve and Tony having a slap fight as Steve was always in the right from start to finish and the final battle is just a battle over their personal problems.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
As opposed to the one where Tony builds fascistic prisons in alternate dimensions for people to be held indefinitely and Captain America is attacked by SHIELD before the law is even signed for stating an intention to oppose what isn't yet law, and the final battle is just Cap randomly giving up because gasp some of the civilians support Stark?
 
Alex said:
Its a better told story but I do feel the adaptation missed out on some of the most important bits (IMO) to the comic. In the movie the registration act would affect... little over a dozen people (not counting agents of shield) where as in the comics the law would apply to hundreds of people one way or another. There was a much larger scope and weight that I feel was lost when its range is reduced to such a small crowd.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
yeah but the comic was also blatantly written with one side being right (the side that wanted to militarize the heros) which the movie got right by leaving it on a much more ambiguous ending.
Lunatic350 said:
As opposed to the one where Tony builds fascistic prisons in alternate dimensions for people to be held indefinitely and Captain America is attacked by SHIELD before the law is even signed for stating an intention to oppose what isn't yet law, and the final battle is just Cap randomly giving up because gasp some of the civilians support Stark?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
there was also the fact that stark started up a group of villains to hunt down and kill heroes on the other side.
also there was the fact that he had clor kill goliath.
ANd this isnt even getting into how captain america was a giant idiot and douche in the comics.
suffice it to say civil war was the dumpster fire.
Edit: also civil war essentially ended up being a character assassination of mr. fantastic since he was written as some bizarre robot trying to understand emotions.
Double Edit: it also spawned civil war 2, which was even worse.
 
Last edited:
Fluffy said:
yeah but the comic was also blatantly written with one side being right (the side that wanted to militarize the heros) which the movie got right by leaving it on a much more ambiguous ending.

there was also the fact that stark started up a group of villains to hunt down and kill heroes on the other side.
also there was the fact that he had clor kill goliath.
ANd this isnt even getting into how captain america was a giant idiot and douche in the comics.
suffice it to say civil war was the dumpster fire.
Edit: also civil war essentially ended up being a character assassination of mr. fantastic since he was written as some bizarre robot trying to understand emotions.
Double Edit: it also spawned civil war 2, which was even worse.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

IMO, the question of government control of Superheros is almost never handled well, because most writers want to eat their cake and have it too when it comes to dealing with the mildly fascistic implications of the genre. Civil War and similar plotlines often end up coming across as something along the lines of 'Freikorps good, organizing the Freikorps into Schutzstaffel bad, Freikorps defeating the Schutzstaffel good' when doing the second has historically been a logical extension of the first being a thing.
 
Hakazin said:
IMO, the question of government control of Superheros is almost never handled well, because most writers want to eat their cake and have it too when it comes to dealing with the mildly fascistic implications of the genre.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think at least part of it is backlash against the comics code and the government concerns that lead to it.
 
In quite a few respects, the Harry Potter movies had advantages over the books. The HP books are undeniably great, but the latter novels in the series are also absolutely loaded with cruft involving meandering sideplots, numerous characters, and plodding pacing. The later movies often opted to cut out or shorten those parts in order to tighten up the story, which made the plots hit stronger.

Additionally, while the books took up far too much time with Harry's narration to the point that they ended up making him unsympathetic, the same parts in the movie do a much better job of selling his internal turmoil to the audience while not spending too much time on it.

Additionally, the movies also manage to nail and improve on the aesthetics of the Harry Potter universe with numerous little details that sell this as a living, breathing world while still retaining the charm of the books. My own personal favourite is the depiction of the Knight Bus in Azkaban, which was already pretty good in the original.

Don't get me wrong, the books are still amazing and do some things better than the movies -- but the older I get, the more I appreciate the things the movies did well -- and even prefer them to the books, on occasion.

I'll try to think of something that's less of an edge case for my next post. :V
 
Fernandel said:
In quite a few respects, the Harry Potter movies had advantages over the books. The HP books are undeniably great, but the latter novels in the series are also absolutely loaded with cruft involving meandering sideplots, numerous characters, and plodding pacing. The later movies often opted to cut out or shorten those parts in order to tighten up the story, which made the plots hit stronger.

Additionally, while the books took up far too much time with Harry's narration to the point that they ended up making him unsympathetic, the same parts in the movie do a much better job of selling his internal turmoil to the audience while not spending too much time on it.

Additionally, the movies also manage to nail and improve on the aesthetics of the Harry Potter universe with numerous little details that sell this as a living, breathing world while still retaining the charm of the books. My own personal favourite is the depiction of the Knight Bus in Azkaban, which was already pretty good in the original.

Don't get me wrong, the books are still amazing and do some things better than the movies -- but the older I get, the more I appreciate the things the movies did well -- and even prefer them to the books, on occasion.

I'll try to think of something that's less of an edge case for my next post. :V
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I would add that the Deathly Hallows duology of films is (IMO) a quantum leap in quality over the book, and manage to turn several of the books weaknesses (the bulk of the plot being the Trio just bumblefucking around the Lake Country for no reason, Harry and Voldemort's literal cringe inducing finale, the battle of Hogwarts being a fairly bloodless affair, etc.) into some of the films highlights; I will take the films depiction of the final duel (and doubly so for Harry's reaction to obtaining the Elder Wand) over the books any day of the week.
 
Men in Black was a lackluster comic book, that was made into an excellent movie.

I also consider the first Rambo movie to be a much better experience than the book it was based on -- the book had the "hero" be a vet who tries to commit suicide by cop, but keeps on killing the cops instead thanks to some kind of super combat reflexes he can't turn off. In the first movie, Rambo is the victim of an uncaring system.
 
Matilda the movie is a vast improvement and much more memorable than the book.

Don't get me wrong, Roald Dahl is great and the book isn't bad, but the transition from book to movie was done practically perfectly.

The family was the Dursleys before the Dursleys, the main character is very likable and sympathetic, the villain was fantastically over the top, and it is just a treat to watch.

I think I've seen that movie over a hundred times by now, and it's one of the defining films of my childhood.
 
Last edited:
Starship Troopers? Well, it's safer to say the book and the movie are different in tone, I suppose.
 
Does Dr. Strangelove count, considering it's an entirely different genre than the book it's based on?
 
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top