Get Premium
Dark mode theme is available exclusively for premium users. Learn more about the benefits of subscribing.
No fees, cancel anytime.
Dark Mode 
No fees, cancel anytime 
Adapting a book to the screen is quite a challenge. Cut a scene, and critics might accuse you of ruining the narrative. Alter a character, and you risk alienating fans. But if done right, it's truly impressive.
There's a whole discussion on Reddit where people have been sharing rare examples of filmmakers surpassing the source material with their cinematic vision. From cult classics such as American Psycho to more recent productions like I’m Thinking of Ending Things, here are the movies that audiences believe are actually better than the book.
This post may include affiliate links.
#1
Carrie. It was Kings first book and, although good, there was emotion and depth in Sissy Spacek’s portrayal that went far beyond the character in the orig story.
RELATED:
#3
Godfather.
The book was obviously a best seller but it had some really - REALLY — cringe side plots (involving huge d***s and huge vags; Puzo seems to have had a fetish about outsized sex organs) which Coppola wisely dropped in the film.
Christopher Crockett 4 months ago
I love seeing Vito playing with the young cat. He's this ruthless mob boss yet he can enjoy the antics of an innocent creature. I also love that the cat just wandered in and Brando picked it up and started playing with it. The cat wasn't in the script!
#4
Forrest Gump. The book was … something.
Manic Mama 4 months ago
100% agree. The book was incredibly incredibly awful. And a complete waste of time.
#5
Shawshank Redemption is a great movie. Book is good, as well.
Somebodys grandmother 4 months ago
No way! In the book the main carakter is cold distant and introvert... Tim Robbins is not that in the mowie. But I LOVE both! The book and the film give very different impressions...
#6
Jaws, in my opinion. The book is not bad, don’t get me wrong, but the characters in it are extremely unlikeable. I think Spielberg was right to eliminate some of the subplots and to buff the characters up to be more likable/relatable. Also, the end of the book kinda sucked. I won’t spoil it, but compared to the movie it’s extremely anti-climatic.
I still like both, the book is still a very good read and I understand why it was such a phenomenon, but I’ll always say the movie was better.
#7
Silence of the Lambs. Of course it followed the book almost exactly.
#8
How to train your dragon franchise.
Pan Narrans 4 months ago
Yup. I tried the books after the movies and that was an enormous letdown.
#9
Who Framed(Censored) Roger Rabbit.
The books plot is very different, and the characters are all unlikeable. Eddie isn't a tragic character who's dealing with his brothers death by drinking his life away and alienating all the toons he used to befriend. He's a hard bitten, hard drinking a*****e just because. Roger is dead, and the character who k*lled him doesn't really make any sense. The producers of the movie took the idea of a world with toons and humans and threw away the plot. They made the right choice; the movie turned out amazing.
Michael Largey 4 months ago
The plot for "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" is based on an unused script for a second "Chinatown" sequel.
#10
Stand By Me (based on Stephen King’s “The Body”)… I loved the book too! But the movie is a classic to me, just perfect rendition.
Seonag Udell 4 months ago
Same principle as Shawshank it's a novella and in the same collection too. Different seasons
#11
Goodfellas (based on the novel Wiseguy by Nicholas Pileggi). Wiseguy is actually pretty interesting, it’s basically Henry Hill telling his own story. But Goodfellas is a masterpiece.
#12
American Psycho.
The book really goes deep into Patrick's obsession with fashion and dining culture. It gets a little tedious.
rorschach-penguin 4 months ago
The book is not meant to be an easy read like Harry Potter. A lot is being said in Patrick's various obsessive tirades. It puts you a lot deeper into his chilling view of himself and humanity.
#13
MASH. it was a mediocre novel, but one heck of a movie and a very good TV series.
Michael Largey 4 months ago
Even the author of the novel M*A*S*H said the movie was much better.
#14
The Martian.
The book was excellent, but after a while Mark Watney started to feel like Wile E Coyote with things constantly falling on him. The movie kept just the right amount of adversity to keep the story moving along and never got too bogged down in the details the way the book sometimes did.
#15
Jurassic Park is a good book, but an all-time great movie.
Upstaged75 4 months ago
I actually like both movie and book equally for different reasons. The book has lots of interesting details, but the movie had just the right amount of tension and suspense. Probably one of the only times I've screamed out loud in a movie theater. (When the raptor bursts through the wall at Ellie) Spoiler: Malcolm and Hammond die in the book. Hammond falls and can't get up, then gets eaten by a pack of Compys. (the little dinos)
#16
The Children of Men. Book was good. Movie is top 20 all time.
#17
Matilda. Danny DeVito k*lled it.
rullyman 4 months ago
Disagree. Maybe this is a cultural thing. I'm from the UK and Roald Dahl is a national treasure here... his work feels very British. I hated the American adaptation when I was a child. It didn't feel right at all. As an adult I can appreciate the cast and the work that went into it, but culturally it still doesn't feel like Dahl's books felt to me.
#18
No Country For Old Men is the best literal film representation of any book I’ve ever read. Both are masterpieces.
#19
I am an avid Stephen King fan, but I have to admit, the movie version of **The Shining** was very good, and better IMO than the book. However, in most cases SK's books are much better than the movies / shows / miniseries.
#22
The top answer should be "Paddington."
That movie had no business being as good as it is. The sequel too. Brings that bear to life like no book could.
#23
Casino Royale - the improved Felix Leiter character makes it infinitely more interesting, buttressed by an amazing performance from Jeffrey Wright.
First Blood - the book is just violence p*rn.
LOTR - ok I know this one is going to p**s a lot of people off. Tolkien never intended to write a story in the way we think of a novel/movie. I get that. He did what he was going for very well. But I find the movies more enjoyable. Sue me. That said, The Hobbit movies are garbage. Peter Jackson reached George Lucasian heights in making a prequel trilogy that’s so bad it diminishes the quality of the original. If you don’t have time to read the book and want to see it on screen, watch the Rankin Bass cartoon from the 70s.
#24
The Secret Life of Walter Mitty
The original text is a depressing short story of a guy dreaming of being greater than his actual tedious life. I love that movie even though it isn't terribly popular.
#25
The Mist. The book is better for most of it, but the ending in the movie knocks the socks off the book ending.
Cat Chat 4 months ago
Steven King said the way he wrote the ending, the main character (the dad) suggested the movie's ending is something he might potentially do. Pay attention in the book and it's there. I also have The Mist as a Stereo Sound Dramatization. It's awesome. It sounds like you are in the middle of all the action and, if you use headphones or stereo speakers, you only hear certain sounds only one or the other side. It's one of my favorite King short stories.
#28
Coraline. The book was all right, but the movie was iconic.
rullyman 4 months ago
While Laika studios does amazing animation, the tone of the film was so different to the book. I much preferred the book. It felt creepier, and Coraline was all alone, except for the cat, who was impossible to rely on. In the film they added that random boy, who was totally unnecessary, and they ramped up the action, which changed the tone a lot.
#29
Both Fight Club and LA Confidential are much better movies than books.
Sometimes taking a second pass through the narrative to tighten it up for a two hour movie can tighten up the mistakes.
#30
I feel like a lot of it depends on the order one reads/watches initially. That said...
I prefer the film *Memoirs of a Geisha* to the book.
And *Howl's Moving Castle*. I didn't like the books at all.
What do you think ?
Ace 4 months ago
I think in the majority of cases it really depends on your first exposure. If you're a fan of books then it's very unusual that a film will improve upon it - as a film buff who later reads the book you're nearly always going to be disappointed. And of course a lot of "books of the film" were written later, so have ne real integrity or value.
Moosy Girl 4 months ago
I rarely have this, unless the adaptation is offensively terrible. The recent The Watch tv series is an example (for me) of something that is already just bad becoming insultingly bad knowing what it’s ‘inspired by’. But usually I’m pretty good at letting books and movies just be their own thing and liking both. Sometimes I wonder if it’s because I have no imagination of my own that I can accept adaptations pretty easily.
Load More Replies...
xolitaire 4 months ago
12 monkeys. The movie is great, but the book portrays the absurdity of the situation and the stress the main character is under much better.
Marnie 4 months ago
Oooh. Never knew this was based on a book. It's one of the few actual Sci Fi movies out there. (So much so-called Sci Fi is not Sci Fi.) I'll have to read that one.
Load More Replies...
Chan Sue Lynn 4 months ago (edited)
Legally Blonde. I love the main character in the movie. The novel....not so much.
Ace 4 months ago
I think in the majority of cases it really depends on your first exposure. If you're a fan of books then it's very unusual that a film will improve upon it - as a film buff who later reads the book you're nearly always going to be disappointed. And of course a lot of "books of the film" were written later, so have ne real integrity or value.
Moosy Girl 4 months ago
I rarely have this, unless the adaptation is offensively terrible. The recent The Watch tv series is an example (for me) of something that is already just bad becoming insultingly bad knowing what it’s ‘inspired by’. But usually I’m pretty good at letting books and movies just be their own thing and liking both. Sometimes I wonder if it’s because I have no imagination of my own that I can accept adaptations pretty easily.
Load More Replies... xolitaire 4 months ago
12 monkeys. The movie is great, but the book portrays the absurdity of the situation and the stress the main character is under much better.
Marnie 4 months ago
Oooh. Never knew this was based on a book. It's one of the few actual Sci Fi movies out there. (So much so-called Sci Fi is not Sci Fi.) I'll have to read that one.
Load More Replies... Chan Sue Lynn 4 months ago (edited)
Legally Blonde. I love the main character in the movie. The novel....not so much.
You May Like 30 Hollywood Secrets That Celebs And Execs Would Like To Be Swept Under The Rug 50 Movies Based On Books That Do Justice To The Original Story 50 Underrated Movies Revealed for Your Cinematic Nights
Mantas Kačerauskas
Linas Simonaitis
Linas Simonaitis
Related on Bored Panda
