And what movies were better than the book that inspired them?

I think the Swedish version of "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo" - Stieg Larssen, was better than the book. I enjoyed the book but it was overly long, I thought, needed serious editing. It takes nearly 100 pages for the story to get going, then the story contnues for 100 pages after it really should have ended. Also, the actor who plays Lisbeth Salander is brilliant, and I liked the guy too. I also thought it was a good decision to leave a lot of the subplots out of the movie. I haven't seen the US version, I'm a bit scared to.

I also think that the TV series of "The No. 1 Ladies Detective Agency" was better than the books. The books are light entertainment, but very twee and rather patronising. At least the TV series had some great scenery and good performances.

The Last of the Mohicans film was far better than the book, although I enjoyed the book a lot.

Did anybody watch the movie ?

If you're interested in chat about LOTM, there still is a site on the web, www.mohicanpress.com, called "On the Trail of The last of the Mohicans," which went on for years with film commentary, critiques, and "musings;" interviews with actors, clips of favorite lines, discussions on where filmed, shops where you could buy related goods, etc. I haven't seen how much has been archived and what is still active now. They used to have yearly gatherings/then reunions on location in North Carolina. I myself saw the film about eight times, and I can well imagine how many times the more active followers saw it.

>1 jothom: I enjoyed both the book and the film. I agree that the Lisbeth Salander actor was excellent. I too have not seen the US version and I am not going to. I have seen the trailer and the only things it appears to add are loud, thumpy music and dramatic camera angles that are meant to stun rather than awe.

I was disappointed in the two Swedish sequels. They told the story but seemed to have lost the heart of the story. It was a matter of going through the motions rather than creating a worthwhile film.

The films of John Grisham books have consistently been better than the books. The Grisham books I have read and seen the films of are: The Firm; Pelican Brief; The Client. In each of these cases the film was much better than the book.

Another film that was better than the book, not that it would have been difficult to achieve, was The Da Vinci Code. Several glaring incongruities in the book were removed from the story as told in the film.

The Remains of the Day

Just reread the book (excellent) and resaw the Merchant Ivory film (even better).

The Notebook. At least I thought so.

Forrest Gump. I picked up a copy of the book a couple of years after watching the movie and it was such a disappointment to me.

I have read two John Grisham books and found the films better; The Firm and The Pelican Brief.

Also, the film of Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code rectifies some errors in the book, but not all.

Wizard of Oz. The movie was amazing, the book meh.

Thanks to Ruth Negga's performance as Tulip O'Hare & maybe Dominic Cooper's hair, I enjoyed the first season of Preacher far more than the first issue of the graphic novel. The later seasons on AMC not so much, but I have no comparison to make with the later issues, since there was no incentive to read them.

Oh, the Princess Bride! The book is intermittently tedious, the movie: never.

Black Hawk Down

Logan's Run. Probably because the book was very sixties, and the movie was very early 80s. At least the movie was pretty. And I think they fleshed the story out more in the movie, to get a longer (and more interesting) running time.