30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books

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.

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books 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.

wadubois , Red Bank Films Report

Final score:

66points

POST

Libstak 3 months ago

Sissy was perfect for that role.

24points

View more comments

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books I feel like the Princess Bride was better as a movie.

Quiverjones , 20th Century Fox Report

Final score:

54points

POST

ucp 3 months ago

I love both. Goldman obviously has chops as a screenwriter, because it’s a classic film with funny dialogue, fabulous set pieces, good characters, and a plot that keeps moving. But his book allowed for more detail, and slightly more bite in the humour.

25points

View More Replies...

View more comments

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books 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.

amerkanische_Frosch , Paramount Pictures Report

Final score:

48points

POST

Christopher Crockett 3 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!

9points

View More Replies...

View more comments

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books Forrest Gump. The book was … something.

excaligirltoo , Paramount Pictures Report

Final score:

48points

POST

Manic Mama 3 months ago

100% agree. The book was incredibly incredibly awful. And a complete waste of time.

19points

View More Replies...

View more comments

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books Shawshank Redemption is a great movie. Book is good, as well.

fonebone819 , Columbia Pictures Report

Final score:

48points

POST

Somebodys grandmother 3 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...

8points

View more comments

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books 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.

annieknowsall , Universal Pictures Report

Final score:

45points

POST

Mad Dragon 3 months ago

You're going to need a bigger boat.

9points

View More Replies...

View more comments

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books Silence of the Lambs. Of course it followed the book almost exactly.

TMQ73 , Strong Heart Productions Report

Final score:

44points

POST

Bronwyn 3 months ago

This for me was the first time I couldn't tell which I liked more. The book offered intimate details the movie couldn't exactly portray, but the movie did an excellent job of portraying all the details visually. I decided it was a tie. First time in my life.

28points

View More Replies...

View more comments

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books How to train your dragon franchise.

CatMom1201 , DreamWorks Animation Report

Final score:

43points

POST

Pan Narrans 3 months ago

Yup. I tried the books after the movies and that was an enormous letdown.

9points

View More Replies...

View more comments

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books 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.

Yakb0 , Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures Report

Final score:

42points

POST

Michael Largey 3 months ago

The plot for "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?" is based on an unused script for a second "Chinatown" sequel.

3points

View more comments

#10

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books 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.

anon , Columbia Pictures Report

Final score:

42points

POST

Seonag Udell 3 months ago

Same principle as Shawshank it's a novella and in the same collection too. Different seasons

11points

View More Replies...

View more comments

#11

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books 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.

Flurb4 , Warner Bros. Pictures Report

Final score:

37points

POST

PSimms 3 months ago

Just FYI, the book Wiseguy is not a novel, it's not fiction.

4points

View More Replies...

View more comments

#12

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books American Psycho.

The book really goes deep into Patrick's obsession with fashion and dining culture. It gets a little tedious.

eviltedfurgeson , lionsgate Report

Final score:

37points

POST

rorschach-penguin 3 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.

8points

View more comments

#13

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books MASH. it was a mediocre novel, but one heck of a movie and a very good TV series.

Neat-Ad-8987 , 20th Century Fox Television Report

Final score:

35points

POST

Michael Largey 3 months ago

Even the author of the novel M*A*S*H said the movie was much better.

8points

View More Replies...

View more comments

#14

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books 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.

afriendincanada , 20th Century Studios Report

Final score:

35points

POST

rullyman 3 months ago

I disagree too... the book was gripping. If it had been adapted 1:1, it wouldn't have made a good film, but it works as a book where you read it bit by bit. I liked that he had problem after problem

18points

View More Replies...

View more comments

#15

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books Jurassic Park is a good book, but an all-time great movie.

theyusedthelamppost , Universal Pictures Report

Final score:

34points

POST

Smilodon, a Bad Cat 3 months ago

That's not a scene from Jurassic Park.

50points

View More Replies...

View more comments

#16

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books The Children of Men. Book was good. Movie is top 20 all time.

DrunkestJesus , Universal Pictures Report

Final score:

34points

POST

The lion tamer 3 months ago

The first time I found a book inferior than its movie adaptation.

3points

View more comments

#17

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books Matilda. Danny DeVito k*lled it.

whatevernamedontcare , Sony Pictures Releasing Report

Final score:

32points

POST

rullyman 3 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.

31points

View More Replies...

View more comments

#18

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books No Country For Old Men is the best literal film representation of any book I’ve ever read. Both are masterpieces.

Scevs , Miramax Films Report

Final score:

31points

POST

Pandarosa 3 months ago

Couldn't agree more, Javier Bardem was terrifying

15points

View More Replies...

View more comments

See Also on Bored Panda

50 Of The Most Incredible Shots That Were Submitted To The Comedy Wildlife Photography Awards

French Diver’s “Jewels” In Tight Swimming Trunks Become Talk Of The Town At Olympics

#29

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books 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.

Idolitor , Warner Bros. Report

Final score:

15points

POST

xolitaire 3 months ago

Yeah, but most books are not written in a "tightened up" style with a 2 hours movie in mind?

3points

View more comments

#30

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books 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.

Exact_Roll_4048 , Sony Pictures Releasing Report

Final score:

13points

POST

Ace 3 months ago

Memoirs of a Geisha is a brilliant book. Like so many of these I've read it but never felt inclined to watch the movie - didn't even know there was one TBH.

8points

View More Replies...

View more comments

Note: this post originally had 50 images. It’s been shortened to the top 30 images based on user votes.

Rokas is a writer at Bored Panda with a BA in Communication. After working for a sculptor, he fell in love with visual storytelling and enjoys covering everything from TV shows (any Sopranos fans out there?) to photography. Throughout his years in Bored Panda, over 300 million people have read the posts he's written, which is probably more than he could count to.

Read less »

Kotryna is a Photo Editor at Bored Panda with a BA in Graphic Design. Before Bored Panda, she worked as a freelance graphic designer and illiustrator. When not editing, she enjoys working with clay, drawing, playing board games and drinking good tea.

Read less »

What do you think ?

POST

Ace 3 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.

10points

xolitaire 3 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.

6points

Chan Sue Lynn 3 months ago (edited)

Legally Blonde. I love the main character in the movie. The novel....not so much.

3points

JayWantsACat 3 months ago

Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs.

2points

Julie S 3 months ago

Bridget Jones films are so much better. Mrs Doubtfire.

2points

Guess Undheit 3 months ago

"In The Heat Of The Night". Sidney Poitier and Rod Steiger's relationship is much more believable than the book. (Why would a deputy work with an out of town cop, not the sheriff?) And the intensity of their performances made it an all time great. Plus, the plot of the murder is much more believable than the second tier novel it's based on.

2points

Kate 3 months ago

Holes and Stardust Both are on my all-time favourites list. (But after I read the Stardust book I was like... what's this piece of...?)

2points

Kurt Ramsey 3 months ago

Last of the Mohicans. The movie is a classic, I've seen it dozens of time. The farthest I've every made it into the book is page 18 and that was with three seperate attempts.

1point

Robert Beveridge 3 months ago

How does no one ever remember the single greatest quality gap between book and movie of all time in these lists? The painfully obvious choice is Psycho.

1point

Id row 3 months ago

I think True Blood and Dexter should have been on that list. The books for each were just ok, but the series were sooooo good (aside from the last season of Dexter).

1point

Dame Cherry 3 months ago

How in hell is Lord of The Rings not on here??? The films are so much better than the books

1point

roddy 3 months ago

The Exorcist and The Da Vinci code. Both very badly written. Movies not amazing either, but certainly better.

1point

ggus44 3 months ago

Maze Runner. First book is good, 2nd and 3rd are just awful. For these 2, the movies were so much better.

1point

Clover 3 months ago

I'd like to add " The Notebook " to this list. I liked the movie better because it seemed to have many more details than the book had. The book seemed to me like a mere outline for the movie.

0points

Giles McArdell 3 months ago

A bit old hat but I tried reading the classic "20,000 leagues under the sea", seems like about 70% of it is just describing all the different undersea flora and fauna, deadly boring!

0points

Sophia Athene 3 months ago

I never read a book before watching the movie (unless I've read the book before a movie was made). The reason why is that I enjoy the movie and then turn to the book for more of that world and the characters, to experience and love so much more of it. If I read the book first, I go into the movie with more expectations and usually come away mad b/c it did the book a disservice. Has worked every time but once since I started this rule for myself. Return of the King is my best example. Hadn't read the books before and was so into the film trilogy I couldn't wait a year to know how the story played out. Instead of getting lost in the story and visuals, I'm critiquing the movie as I go. I said I would walk out if 2 things didn't happen and I was anxiously waiting on them: Eowyn and the Witch King and the Eagles returning. Instead of Eowyn surprising the sh!t out of me and me losing my mind over my 2nd fave part in the trilogy, I'm sitting there thinking, "You damn right that's in there."

0points

Ursula S. 3 months ago

Field of Dreams.

0points

Slapdash1 3 months ago

Seems like at least half of the choices are on the list because the books are too long. Brainrot.

0points

Aidan Pite 3 months ago

Quest for Camelot. 'Based on' the book The King's Damosel by Vera Chapman. The movie has 100% less rape than the books, the guy doesn't choose death over love, and there's a wisecracking talking dragon thrown in just for funsies.

0points

Joey Jo Jo Shabadoo 3 months ago (edited)

"The Ghost and Mrs Muir". The novel is well-written, but the movie has Rex Harrison and Gene Tierney and thats hard to compete with.

0points

Marnie 3 months ago

Not a movie, but a mini-series. The Queen's Gambit series is one of my favorite shows of all time. The book is just very dry. The series does follow the book quite closely. There were a couple of things I liked better about the book, but overall the series is really marvelous.

0points

SkippityBoppityBoo 3 months ago (edited)

I'm going to stick up for Stephen King, obviously! Cos I've loved his books from an early age! Some of the film adaptations of his books cannot fully show/depict what is in the book. Even if they're filmed as a series. They can't get all the tiny details that Stephen King gets into books. I've read 'Big Driver' in "Full Moon, No Stars" and it's graphic to an extent but I also have the DVD of it. It's about retribution... It's one I'd recommend but be warned as it deals with a pretty horrific assault, violence against a female. Its helped me a lot with dealing with my own stuff... He does deal with female DV and survivor things a lot. As in writes about them. Dolores Claiborne... Rose Madder... And they helped me.... I think a lot of his books are about being in a very bad situation, terrible, horrific but a lot of them are about Survival... And That You Will.

0points

Mariele Scherzinger 3 months ago

Once Were Warriors. A powerful film, based on a very mediocre book.

0points

POST

Ace 3 months ago

10points

xolitaire 3 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.

6points

Chan Sue Lynn 3 months ago (edited)

Legally Blonde. I love the main character in the movie. The novel....not so much.

3points

JayWantsACat 3 months ago

Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs.

2points

Julie S 3 months ago

Bridget Jones films are so much better. Mrs Doubtfire.

2points

Guess Undheit 3 months ago

2points

Kate 3 months ago

Holes and Stardust Both are on my all-time favourites list. (But after I read the Stardust book I was like... what's this piece of...?)

2points

Kurt Ramsey 3 months ago

Last of the Mohicans. The movie is a classic, I've seen it dozens of time. The farthest I've every made it into the book is page 18 and that was with three seperate attempts.

1point

Robert Beveridge 3 months ago

How does no one ever remember the single greatest quality gap between book and movie of all time in these lists? The painfully obvious choice is Psycho.

1point

Id row 3 months ago

I think True Blood and Dexter should have been on that list. The books for each were just ok, but the series were sooooo good (aside from the last season of Dexter).

1point

Dame Cherry 3 months ago

How in hell is Lord of The Rings not on here??? The films are so much better than the books

1point

roddy 3 months ago

The Exorcist and The Da Vinci code. Both very badly written. Movies not amazing either, but certainly better.

1point

ggus44 3 months ago

Maze Runner. First book is good, 2nd and 3rd are just awful. For these 2, the movies were so much better.

1point

Clover 3 months ago

I'd like to add " The Notebook " to this list. I liked the movie better because it seemed to have many more details than the book had. The book seemed to me like a mere outline for the movie.

0points

Giles McArdell 3 months ago

A bit old hat but I tried reading the classic "20,000 leagues under the sea", seems like about 70% of it is just describing all the different undersea flora and fauna, deadly boring!

0points

Sophia Athene 3 months ago

0points

Ursula S. 3 months ago

Field of Dreams.

0points

Slapdash1 3 months ago

Seems like at least half of the choices are on the list because the books are too long. Brainrot.

0points

Aidan Pite 3 months ago

0points

Joey Jo Jo Shabadoo 3 months ago (edited)

"The Ghost and Mrs Muir". The novel is well-written, but the movie has Rex Harrison and Gene Tierney and thats hard to compete with.

0points

Marnie 3 months ago

0points

SkippityBoppityBoo 3 months ago (edited)

0points

Mariele Scherzinger 3 months ago

Once Were Warriors. A powerful film, based on a very mediocre book.

0points

30 Surprising Film Adaptations That Outdid Their Books

Games

Rokas Laurinavičius

Rokas Laurinavičius

Kotryna Br

Kotryna Br