Most times if you've read the book first, the movie just can't capture all that the book did. Occasionally, while different you can still enjoy both.

I'd love to hear your opinions on books you've read vs. the movie version. Sometimes I just really love a movie and go looking for the book... I did this with What Dreams May Come and was surprised to find a very different story altogether.

So many book-to-movie successes to choose from! Three random picks:

A brilliant cast and crew transformed Michael Cunningham's The Hours into an exquisite movie. The Philip Glass soundtrack is so evocative, and I'm still haunted by Jack Rovello's expertly directed portrayal of Richie.

Mary Badham's Scout in To Kill a Mockingbird, especially in the scenes with Gregory Peck, captured the parts of the book I liked best.

Rob Reiner's Stand by Me brings to life Stephen King's amusing and moving short story, "The Body" from Different Seasons � which includes "Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption," which also became a terrific movie, with a shorter title and a first-rate cast.

OK, so that's four. Like I said, so many to choose from. A book that's better than the movie would be Pride and Prejudice if we're talking about the Keira Knightley-Matthew Macfadyen version, but not the Jennifer Ehle-Colin Firth one, which in any case is a TV series.

I'm sure I'll add more to this thread as I think of more �

I found I quite enjoyed the film version of The Lion The Witch and the Wardrobe - I remember seeing a TV version that disappointed me and was pleasantly surprised by the film.

I often find if I have read a book the film will not live up to the images in my head. I think The Lion The Witch etc may have worked well for me as a film because it was a long time since I had read the book.

I have not read the Harry Potter books (yet - maybe I will get round to them soon!) but have enjoyed the films.

The Harry Potter books are tremendously better than the movies. I stopped watching the movies after the third one. The films are terrible compared to the books.

There are only two films I like better than the original book. The first is Fahrenheit 451 (1966) and The Andromeda Strain (1971). However the 1970s version of The Three Musketeers with Michael York, Oliver Reed, Faye Dunaway, Christopher Lee, Charleton Heston and Rachel Welch was very good. It was very close to the book.

I saw the last Harry Potter movie (in 3D) today. Not quite what I expected... And I will get round to the books.

I too enjoyed the film Farenheit 451. And thinking of numbers I also thought the film 1984 was good - caught both the bleakness and the terror of the book.

Most times if I loved the book,I stay away from the movie. It's so hard to capture the detail and depth of it all. Recently I finished a series of novels by George R. R. Martin - not in the romance genre, though there are some romances within it. HBO just finished a series of 10 shows on the first book, and I have to say they did a great job with it.

I'm a fan of Diana Gabaldon's Outlander series, and there is talk of a movie, but I'm positive that the characters are so fixed in my mind it would be impossible to cast them and live up to her characters in a movie. Her novels average 700-900 pages each.

<3 George RR Martin and A Song of Ice and Fire! The TV series was awesome, and the only complaints I had about it were things that clearly had to be cut for the sake of time constraints. Would have loved to see more of the direwolves... but oh well. The only thing I really didn't understand why they didn't focus on more was the developing relationship between Dany and Drogo... a lot of what was in the book was lost in the series, and my fiance -- who hasn't read the books -- was a little baffled on why they suddenly seemed to actually get along.

I think it's actually a very good romance movie as well as being an epic fantasy, war, horror, intrigue, etc. The relationships are so real -- there's none of the sugar-coating that's in so many movies that cross the line between romance and otherworldly. People who love each other fight, argue and have moments where they hate what the other is doing and standing for, and they have to decide what to do about it. It's not a given. And the idea of romantic relationships is such a driving factor that shapes so many characters.... look at Cersei! What she is makes perfect sense in terms of what she's been through.

But I could write pages and pages on this series =)

I've heard about The Game of Thrones but haven't read the books or seen the show (no TV). It reminds me of The Lord of the Rings, whose movies were definitely infinitely better than the books.

Don't be dissuaded from reading Game of Thrones by Lord of the Rings! The books are absolutely amazing, but it will take some time to get into them and to keep the characters straight. There are SO many characters, that's been the biggest complaint I've heard from those I've given the book to. But once you keep the who's who straight, you won't be able to put it down. (There's a character cheat sheet in the back of most editions, too!)

He's clearly learned from Tolkien, and completely avoids a lot of the downfalls I found in the book versions of Lord of the Rings. Even though the series is about a war that spans the globe, there are almost no fight scenes -- battles are always told from the point of view of a character on the fringes. (One in particular is told from the point of view of the mother of one battle commanders -- she's been shuffled off to safety with a guard, but she can still hear what's going on. Good stuff.) It's not as much about what's going on in the world -- there's no long, dry lists or summaries -- but about the characters. Very few are "good" or "bad".... even the good ones make questionable decisions and you come to understand the bad ones. Those who have only read or seen the first book/series are always distraught when I throw my allegiance to the Lannisters =)

I confess I haven't come across the Song of Ice and Fire books, but will look out for them. Another person I think has learned from Tolkien (he was, for a while, Tolkien's researcher) is Guy Gavriel Kay. I leant his book A Song For Arbonne to a friend who found it too "romantic" (more stylised romance, I think - I know there is a term for what she meant but cannot remember it). Anyway I think Kay's novels are great - anyone else enjoy them?

I agree the books are terrific. It takes a courageous writer to kill off one of the leading characters in his first book, and a talented one to retain his readers' interest.

The Lannisters, hmm? Well, there is one in particular that has actually been my favorite character of the series (keep in mind I haven't read the last book - waiting for my husband to finish it.) Tyrion. Jaime is growing on me, but that little incident with Bran is hard to forget... unless you have chosen different set of Lannisters... ? If he, however, happens upon a very disfigured maiden and rescues her from what's left of Catelyn.... well.... that would certainly boost his reputation with me.

I agree with your earlier comment that the relationship between Dany and Drogo was so much better in the book than in the HBO series.

I'm hoping Arya will be the connection that prevents Dany from taking revenge against what is left of the Stark family. Or maybe it will be Jon?

As I wait (impatiently) for my turn at the book, it is a great conversation topic for me right now...

The Harry Potter books are much better than the movie version. Due to the time constraints the movies just zoom past some of the details in the book.
And well, I think the movie The Notebook was better than the book. Book was fabulous too, but it got boring in the middle.

I thought the movies made from the Narnia series have been a fantastic representation of the book series.

The Lightning Thief movie (which I also read with my kids) was a huge disappointment.