Me and my girlfriend are both pretty big movie buffs, but at the same time love to read. Lately we've been having a pretty big discussion about our distaste for books being turned into movies. The most recent "big" book title to be turned into a movie is, one of our favorite book series, Twilight.

Twilight is an amazing book and I'm really looking forward to the movie. She, however, is very upset that they decided to make the book into a movie as it will "ruin her view of the characters." We can both agree that the movie will not compare to the book; however, I enjoy watching movies that derived from a book as it furthers my perception of characters and being a visual person it really helps me get back in touch with books I've read in the past.

So what do you guys think? Do you enjoy movies that are derived from books or are you like my girlfriend who absolutely hates when they put your favorite books on the big screen?


( I'm sorry if this is not the right place, I looked and this seemed most fitting.)

I get in moods where I love to read, My favorite author would have to be Stephen King, And I will not watch any movies based on his books until I have read the book. It does not bother me when they turn books into movies. But sometimes you have to wonder if the producers or whoever wrote the movie even read the book, sometimes they are so far off from the book how can they even name it after the book they can be so very different that its ridiculous. But I usually end up watching them anyway. But I would have to sa when they turn books into movies the books are by far better then the movie, and I have no problem imagining the characters and what they look like or how they act.

I absolutely HATE it when they turn books into movies! I can't think of one movie that has been a book, that surpassed the quality of the book. Let me give you the best example I can think of: Battlefield Earth! In my opinion, it is one of the best scifi books out there (even though it was written by scientology's founder). In the box office, it completely smashed. They ended up pulling it out of the theaters! This book has had a contract to be a movie for 20 YEARS and it completely goes down the crapper! Another one that I can't stand: Interview with a Vampire. Great book, OK movie. The movie leaves way too much out IMO. In fact this is the real problem with turning books into movies; there is usually way too much content and they can't cram it all into the movie, leaving something to be desired.
Ok one more example: Night Watch--These are pretty good books, but the movie (filmed in Russia), doesn't capture the atmosphere of the book at all, or basically anything else for that matter.
So in closing: STOP TURNING GREAT BOOKS INTO CRAPPY MOVIES!

Just read the book first and it will be fine, Thats what I've discovered anyways, the movies are usually based on but never live up to the book. But if you see the film first then there is a chance that you won't enjoy the book.

Hmm. So many books are being turned into movies it’s scary.
The one I’m quite apprehensive about is the Uglies trilogy by Scott Westerfeld. It has a lot of stuff in it that is really hard to portray via the screen. Plus the books are awesome and I find that movies tend to do horrible things to books. -.- But I’m still going to watch it XD.

One book-turned-movie which I think was not that good was Stormbreaker. It turned out so much more ridiculous and farfetched than the book – and they changed so many things it wasn’t funny. Somehow the tone of the story changed to realistic and believable (as believable as 14-year-old spy can get anyway) into childish and lame.

I didn't like Twilight, to be honest. I've read all three and do own the last one (...Eclipse?), but I'm sort of strange and have to finish things I've started.

Weirdly enough, I'm kind of looking forward to the movie. The whole thing might be more easily digestible for me when in motion.

I would like to say, most movies that are made from books are inaccurate from the story, and most of the time, not very good. (well, then again, if the movie followed every single plot twist of the book, it would be extremely long.) All the movies leave too much out of the story and the only people that should watch them is people who have not read the books.
( That's why I always wait until a harry potter movie comes out and I watch it before reading the book, it helps dim my hatred toward these movies)

Turning a good book into a movie isn't that great, I mean, can't they just think of thier plots?
Most movies based on books are made by people other than the author(s).

A movie can change the way how you thought a character looked, like the books holes, Stanley was suppose to be extremely overweight, or somewhat like that.

Now, don't get me wrong-- I agree with you. Seeing a film version of one of your favorite books can be extremely irritating. The fact is, that films and novels come from completely different worlds. For example: when you write a play, you use the strength of the play-- dialogue. When you write a book, you use the strength of the book-- description. But when you write a screenplay, you write to your strength, and that is action.

When a film student is taught how to write a movie, they are often given specific parameters that will help them write a "seat of the pants" movie. Most books are, let's face it, not so much thrilling as enthralling. Film authors have to take the book and make it as exciting to watch as it was to read. To do this, they have to cut massive sections out and rewrite whole characters. They have to foreshadow things differently, and present the book in a different medium. Next to zero films give a perfect imitation of the book.

Now, as for the above quote. dwolters, I see your point. But I beg to differ. That awful process of changing book to film is usually detrimental, especially to one who has read the book. But there is one movie that was better than the book. Christmas with the Kranks. Sorry, John Grisham, but Skipping Christmas sucked. And the movie they made out of it didn't. Really.