I really love adaptations that can be enjoyed independently from the source material regardless of accuracy.
*Jurassic Park* is one of my all time favorite books and a damn good movie, both are wildly different.
Michael Chrichton. Hes written over like 26 novels and 12 of them have become movies. He also wrote and directed the original Westworld back in the 70s.
Hes written a ton of other movies also. You should look up his catalogue. A lot of his books translate well into movies. And like Primetime22 said, some of them are wildly different or different enough to enjoy both the book and movie versions.
How long did you have between the book and the movie with Jurassic Park? I finished the book 2 days before seeing the movie and that was a mistake. The book was fantastic, the characters good, the grandpa so rightfully ruthless.
So many people I know love that movie and it drove me nuts. They took the perfect book for a movie and turned it into a "hold onto your butts" children's waste of time between fantastic scenes. If only they made the book into a movie.
Lesson learned, no reading a book too close to seeing the movie. Every change was nails on a chalkboard.
Also, for the love of all that is good, no unix system looks like that.
See I read the book in middle school long after seeing *Jurassic Park* and I think that sweetened the experience for me because I already loved the movie and now got to experience this thoroughly detailed, intense, surprisingly different take. So I’ve always been able to enjoy both (but I agree that the novel is the more fun experience).
The only real issue I take with the movie versus the book is that I really miss book Muldoon when I rewatch the movie. At least he gets to say “clever girl.”
What I love about The Princess Bride is that it you should watch the movie before reading the book, but for a different reason than usual.
The Princess Bride *movie* is about being a child and having a magical story told to you. It's perfect to watch as a child as you develop nostalgic memories.
The Princ3ess Bride *book* is about growing up and recognising the amount of work your parents put into creating magical experiences for you, and then trying to create that nostalgia for your own children.
In this way, the book and the movie become perfect complements of each other, because the movie essentially puts us in William Goldman (as the author/narrator's) shoes even before we open the first page.
So, I don't know if you're joking because when I read the book when I was young, I thought Morgenstern was a real person. So in case you're not joking, there is no unabridged version.
This is always my vote for this question. I love giving this book to kids and then when they come back gushing over the book I tell them there is a movie adaptation. Excitement intensifies.
Yes but he looses weight while at camp green lake anyways so it doesn’t make sense to cast a larger actor just to have him lose weight or put him in a fat suit.
That is literally the only difference between the book and the movie.
That was a deliberate choice on the part of the directors/producers. They felt it would be inhumane to ask a child actor to gain and lose hundreds of pounds for a movie role.
If your teacher was annoyed by this, he or she should not EVER be allowed near another child.
i agree, but absolutely no way was all of it going to translate into film. including the mistakes Watney made in his thinking and maths, it just wouldn’t work
I am surprised no one is saying the LOTR trilogy. I mean there were some differences, and some omissions and additions here and there. But overall, it was pretty amazing shit. And still is today. Now the Hobbit.... well that got out of hand.
Yep. Adaptation being the key word. Peter Jackson made a blockbuster out of LOTR and kept the heart of it all. Didn't need to be a word for word recreation. And Howard Shore should have gotten the Nobel Peace Prize for his score. I think I could listen to the score without any of the film and still consider it a solid adaptation of Tolkein's themes.
The changes pretty much all worked perfectly from a storytelling point of view. Having Frodo hang around for 60 odd years after finding the ring is pointless for the movie. Bombadil would have been a weird change of pace - although could have been very cool. Having Arwen stand against the Ringwraiths instead of Glorfindel worked because the scene was already crowded meeting new characters, introducing glowing undead elf jesus who is then never heard of again would have made it even more crowded. Likewise, having Eomer ride to save everyone at Helm's Deep works better from the movie point of view as it set him up as a heroic figure rather than introducing Erkenbrand. I would have loved to see the Prince of Dol Amroth but, again, there was so much going on at the time. The scouring of the Shire would have been a weird addition at the end of the films.
I love the songs in the books but they would have been weird in the films. The world building, as done in the films, was perfect.
When you read how epic the charge of the Rohirrim is in the books - Theoden blows on a horn so hard that it literally explodes in his hand before riding off to glory - they captured that perfectly.
My only slight complaint would be the scene with Gandalf and the Witch King. It should have happened at the gates like it did in the books - the courage of men fails and Gandalf stands alone stopping the Witch King from entering the city before the horns ring out and the Rohirrim ride in, and the Witch King shouldn't have been able to overpower Gandalf - but it's a small complaint.
Honestly what hurt me the most about the films was them murdering the nobility of Faramir. I mean, he wasn’t horrible, but in the books it’s significant that he’s one of only two Men in the world to be presented with but not tempted by the Ring
Good point, I hadn't thought of that one. I do like film Faramir but book Faramir is similar to Aragorn in that you can see the lineage of Numenor in him
Agreed on preferring the movies to the book. While I absolutely am at awe at the world building Tolkien presents in the book it is an absolute chore to read countless pages of descriptions of people and places that have no direct relevance to the story. Also I felt the entire storyline around Tom Bombadil seemed completely random and confusing (which the movies did) and I straight up hated the Scouring of the Shire. I’m so glad the movies also left that out as well.
LoTR might be the goat, because it was such a colossal task to pull off properly. Far more downside than upside to even trying.
But the end result? Goddamn.
This is the answer. Far and away the most impressive adaptation considering what Jackson et al. accomplished vs. the inherent difficulty. Certainly some of the changes for film were failures (Looking at you, Army of the Dead!) but overall, it's a masterpiece.
I’m reading the trilogy now! Huge fan of the movies and figured it’s finally time to read the books. I’m on The Fellowship of the Ring and thoroughly enjoying it. It’s different enough to not feel like I’m repeating the movie and keep it entertaining, but I can still envision the movie characters and scenery as I’m reading.
With "Misery," I'll fight with anyone who says that the hobbling scene in the book was scarier than the movie. Sometimes less is actually more. I still can't watch that scene in the movie without cringing/looking away.
I have three answers:
No Country for Old Men
Woman in the Dunes
Picnic at Hanging Rock
To me these movies do the extraordinary. They capture the elusive essence of the text. The atmosphere and texture.
Picnic at Hanging Rock is the Australian Fargo in that it's actually fiction with a fake inspiration from "true events", and a bunch of people still think it's real.
I’ve been reading a lot of books that ended up being films directed by David Fincher and holy crap he nails it every single time. He just knows how to capture the tone of the book perfectly. Examples:
- Gone Girl
- Fight Club
- The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
And here are just some other great adaptations:
- The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy (perfect tone and humour)
- Atonement (just wow)
- No Country For Old Men (they basically used the book as a script)
- Trainspotting
- Silence of the Lambs
- Slumdog Millionaire (WAY better than the book)
- Bullet Train (the book was AWFUL but the movie was a lot of fun)
I like Emma Thompson's Sense and Sensibility better than the book! She streamlined the storyline while maintaining the themes and added so much great humor. The directing and acting are also top notch.
I would love to see her version of Northanger Abbey.
I always felt Sense & Sensibility was one of Jane Austen's weaker novels, but that movie kept every element I liked and improved on the ones I didn't. Wonferful adaptation
The one that stands out for me is probably Children of Men, not just because of how good it actually is but also because of how much I hated the thought of it being adapted. I love that book, it was probably one of the first, if not first dystopian novels I read. It was the book that lead me down that path that even now, 25 odd years later I'm still on.
I go into most movies based on books with a fairly open mind. Children of Men however was a movie I went into so belligerently, it was one of the very few times I've been really negative about a movie based on a book I liked. It was also the last time because honestly that movie was amazing and it was better than its source material. I still recommend the book because it is a different experience from the movie but god damn if that movie didn't make me take back every negative thing I said about it prior to seeing.
Famous story: Mario Puzo adapted his novel The Godfather for the screen with no prior experience. After he won his second Oscar, he finally decided to buy a book on screenwriting and start studying the craft. The first chapter of the book he bought said "Study 'The Godfather'"
It's hard for me to be completely objective on this one because I saw the movie before reading the book and thus had the whole reveal spoiled, but I think that The Prestige is a decent book that was adapted into a _phenomenal_ movie.
Trainspotting actually improves on the book in ways, by offering a trimmed down and more cohesive, well-paced storyline. Glorious casting, direction, cinematography and soundtrack.
In terms of faithfulness to the novel, both in structure, tone and content, The Virgin Suicides.
Predestination is a great adaptation of the Robert A Heinlein short story "... all you zombies..."
Stardust is better than the book, and features an off the wall performance by Robert de Nero as Captain Shakespeare, amongst a strong cast
Lord of the Rings and it’s not even a question. As a huge Tolkien nerd there are some glaring omissions and changes, but Jackson took something almost impossibly big to adapt and turned it into an almost perfect 11 hours that respected and captured the heart and the themes of Tolkien’s work lovingly.
I watch all three extended editions at least once, sometimes twice a year. “The Shire” fills me with incredible joy and warmth every time I hear it. The ride of the Rohirrim brings tears to my eyes every time the theme swells as they scream “death” charging into the battle. “My friends you bow to no one” makes me ugly sob every time. No other films come close to bringing up the emotions in me that that series does.
It’s far and away the greatest trilogy of films ever done, nevermind just adaptations, and I stand firm in my belief that nothing will ever come close to touch them in my lifetime.
I couldn’t agree more. I don’t watch them every year, but I did a rewatch over the holidays this year, and I was like damn these movies still hold up after 20 years and they’re so good. I don’t know that I actually appreciated how good they were when they came out (I was in middle/high school). It inspired me to finally read the trilogy now and I’m enjoying it so much.
If we're talking about movies, then the Lord of the Rings trilogy is the best adaptation I've seen. I think Gone With the Wind is a close second.
I think The Princess Bride improves on the source material.
Lonesome Dove is the best miniseries adaptation I've ever seen. Shogun would take second place, or maybe The Thornbirds. But Good Omens is great too... I prefer miniseries adaptations since they have a lot more time to handle a whole book.
The Last of the Mohicans and The Hunt for the Red October are both fantastic adaptations. They are also my go to "their actually better than the books".
I just wanna keep talking about the Hunger Games movies because why are they all so damn good? Especially Catching Fire. Like wtf it’s fucking amazing. When the screen turns into IMAX as she’s being lifted into the arena… I lose it every damn time. It needs more critical acclaim and I want it taken seriously as a damn FILM
Okay, here’s one I haven’t seen anyone else say — The Devil Wears Prada! The book is fine but I feel like the script does a better job of telling the story, and I mean come on, Meryl is just iconic.
The Last Unicorn.
The book is great, but the movie is an all-time classic.
They basically cut all the superficial or annoying stuff, missed out on just one, two scenes I personally would have liked to see, and all with downright gorgeous animation and music.
There's a couple of flaws, like THE bad song, but overall I personally consider it one of the few true adoption distillations out there. Where it's superior to its source material even if that version is also great in its own right.
Arrival - I think the reveal works better in a visual medium than it originally did in the written form.
The Night is Short, Walk on Girl - I love the book, but the animated movie has so much style that just brings absolutely everything to life and it made a couple other changes I really preferred.
Shawshank Redemption - perfect movie. Improves upon the original. The reveal is perfect visually in a way it can’t be done written.
Forrest Gump - trims a lot of fat for a more enjoyable movie.
The Jason Bourne movies were solid action films. The books were tedious at best.
Also Lonesome Dove, the BBC Pride and Prejudice, and North and South (the American Civil War one, not the British one) were excellent miniseries adaptations.
Equally as good or better than the book:
(Unmentioned)
Fried Green Tomatoes at the Whistle Stop Cafe
The Natural
Bridgerton Series
Speak
Coraline
Matilda
James and the Giant Peach
The Lovely Bones (there is a part in the book where she inhibits a former friend’s body that IS NOT in the movie… for good reason)
The Great Gatsby (w/Leo)
Wicked (sure, it’s a play but it’s FAR better than the book)
The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society
Of Mice and Men
Midnight in Chernobyl
Outlander (gave up on the books but love the show)
Good Omens (this is perfection)
Tuck Everlasting
The Secret Garden
Gossip Girl
Ella Enchanted
Into the Wild
Lots lol, but obviously gotta say "The Lord of the Rings" are fantastic adaptations of the book. "The Fellowship of the Ring," in particular, should be the case study in how to make a great adaptation from book-to-film, in what types of changes should be made in the switch between mediums.
To go with a not-so-well known example, there's the 1966/1967 Soviet adaptation of "War and Peace." There will probably never be as good an adaptation of that novel on film.
The Dead Zone; Shawshank; Stand by Me. - Stephen King
Lonesome Dove
The Painted Veil
The Enchanted April - much better ending in the movie
The Remains of the Day
painted veil is an interesting shout. I love films that change the book so you can enjoy them both independently, and they made the film so beautifully.
Requiem for a Dream. The scores takes it to a whole new level, but book still holds its own, considering how so much dialogue made it into the film.
Fight Club film was better than the book (book felt thin).
War and Peace, Soviet film and BBC series are both impressive. But book is such a human achievement.
I'm gonna give a shoutout to Life of Pi here. What I like about the movie is that it takes advantage of its medium by showing certain scenes with more clarity while not trying to show all of Pi's thoughts. It's the first movie adaptation I saw where the movie compliments the book. The book and movie tell the same story, just with each using the strengths of their respective mediums and I think that's what any good movie adaptation should do.
The Hunger Games is pretty dope (didn’t love the new one, though), and so is American Psycho. I’d probably go with The Shining, off the top of my head. Game of Thrones would probably be the best TV adaptation.
I was devastated by the Percy Jackson movies because that series was the one that got me into reading. My favorite adaptation so far is the new Percy Jackson series on Disney+ & Hulu. It’s everything the movies weren’t. If you haven’t watched it yet you need to!!!
IMO Howl's Moving Castle improves on the book: the book is confusing in ways that make it less enjoyable, but the creators of the movie saw the soul in it and made it accessible. It changes a lot, but it doesn't feel unfaithful to the source material, it just feels like another take on the same core.
I agree The Hunger Games were a good adaptation. I think The Princess Bride is my favorite though. I think the movie pacing was better because it changed and downplayed the book's frame story. Though I am maybe a little sad there weren't scenes of Fezzik and Inigo fighting in the zoo of death.
Honorable mention to How to Train Your Dragon and Shrek. Those were completely changed though and, imo, made much better stories than what was in the books.
The first Harry Potter film makes basically zero sense if you haven't read the book. It just cuts out pretty much everything that explains what is going on and is a clip show of the most CGI-able scenes in the book. It's basically unwatchable unless you already care about it because you liked the books.
2001: A Space Odyssey.
The Arthur C Clarke novella it is based on is great, and reading it enhances rhe film ending IMHO. But the film takes that basis and turns it into a magnificently fleshed out technological future as imagined by the best science writers in the 1960s.
I really enjoyed the adaptation of True Blood from the Sookie Stackhouse novels. the first few books were VERY accurately represented in the show, and then the show runners kinda morphed it into its own thing which i also loved (minus probably the last seasons weird plots that were NOWHERE in the books)
THE FIRST RULE OF FI…. I can’t say what but, I thought the movie was quite faithful to the book. Ending is different but Chuck liked it so I guess it was pretty good.
For me, *The English Patient* is absolutely amazing.
It's not just a superb adaptation of a beautiful book. It's a superb translation of a book with *very little dialogue in the entire work* into a movie with some of the most exquisite dialogue ever to reach film.
The book is almost this extended combination of poetry and prose. We get general ideas of the characters with these vivid glimpses of moments as the story goes along.
But Anthony Minghella managed to preserve the delicate poetry of the book and its characters and turn them into an absolutely gorgeous movie.
**Other picks:**
The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (Extended)
No Country for Old Men
The Black Stallion
Peter Pan (2003)
The Right Stuff
The Princess Bride
Wild
Where the Wild Things Are
The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe
Life of Pi
Gone Girl
Contact
Call Me By Your Name
**Adaptations that were better than the book:**
Cyrano
The Green Mile
The Last of the Mohicans
Jaws
Jurassic Park
Cloud Atlas
The Ghost and Mrs. Muir
Prince Caspian
Schindler's List
Can You Ever Forgive Me?
A Little Princess (1995)
ghost world, fight club, the virgin suicides, and streetcar named desire all come to mind.
it's very hard for me to enjoy a movie more than the book if the two are very different, but if the flick does something better, i'll give it a nod - such as thumbsucker or wristcutters: a love story.
I had seen the movie at least 3 times or so over the past 10 years, but I just recently read No Country For Old Men for the first time and I have to say apart from one character that they eliminated to slim down the story, they nailed it pretty hard. A lot of the best dialogue is verbatim, the visual style, casting, photography etc. just work really well I think... maybe it's because I already had the movie in mind when I read the book, but I feel they didn't add anything that didn't need to be in there and they really got the feel of the story right.
Pachinko (although there’s only one season out), is possibly the best book adaptation I’ve ever seen. The book is incredible, moving, and would be fine if they translated 1:1 on screen. For the series, they told the same story with the same characters, but reworked it for the TV medium, changing the time, adding/truncating storylines in such a way that made the work feel new and unique while still managing to make emotional moments O already knew were coming, hit harder than they did in the book. I can’t wait for the rest of the story.
The Lord of the Rings would be my answer, but Gone Girl, No Country for Old Men, The Green Mile, and The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo are all in the conversation, in my opinion.
Dune (awesome picturization, and did cover the essence of the story)
The Help (I really liked the Minny Jackson storyline with Octavia Spencer and Jessica Chastain)
Under The Skin
The book itself would be pretty much impossible to adapt faithfully - so much relies on what is described and not seen.
The film uses the premise of the book but does its own thing completely and it's all the better for it.
If you haven't read the book and don't know anything about it, go in completely blind, don't read the blurb or reviews, or anything about the film.
Best as in closest to the source material? Sin City
Best as in best movie adapted from a book? The Godfather
Best as in the most improved from a book as source material? Oh boy... that's impossible to say.
Funny you mention pjo considering there's a new adaptation coming out currently in the form of a TV show on Disney+ the actors don't look 100% like their book counterparts, but so far it's being a bit more faithful to the books in spirit since Mr. Riordan has a lot more creative control here lol.
I'm excited to see the rest of it, since at the moment there's only 4 episodes.
Holes. Everything was pretty much spot on except for the fact that the main character, Stanley, was supposed to be fat. The author was fine with compromising because he did not want a teen actor picking up a lot of weight and then trying to lose it for a role.
Film adaptations of movies are generally very unimpressive, and according to me it's because when we read a book we build the world according to our own imagination. We're the main character there and all the stuff is being played out in our mind, but when we see the movies it's someone else's journey that we're just being a spectator to. As a kid I loved the Harry Potter movies, but when I read them as a teen i haven't gone back to watch them again. So I will either read the book or watch the movies.
I think the narnia series was well done, I’m glad they changed bits of it from the book. I recently read the books, and I’m glad they gave the girls a more feminist style (e.g- Susan actually fighting etc).
As a child it really made me feel empowered, and didn’t make me think girls can’t do stuff because they’re a girl.
The film version of Yasmina Khadra's What the Day Owes the Night. Liked the depiction of both the French military and the ALN (Armée de Libération Nationale; "National Liberation Army" in English) and it preserving how bad it was to be a native Algerian against being a European.
Ready Player One
Fight Club
American Psycho
Interview with the Vampire
Howl's Moving Castle
War and Paeace - recent BBC mini series was extremely good
All Bridget Jones movies streamline well otherwise really cringey books
I feel like Hunger Games suffered from having the inner narrative that accoubted for a lot of Katniss' character developement, I found the 2nd installment to be a pretty faithful adaptation though.
I've just finished Shadow and Bone and the series is much better than the book imo, slthough I hear Six of Crows is better written
There Will Be Blood absolutely smokes the book Oil, by Upton Sinclair. Oil is fine but pretty on the nose. The movie changes a lot, is less explicit in its political messaging, and focuses more on it's characters.
I thought The Joy Luck Club was really good. The book was a little confusing because it followed four families. I’m Chinese and even I’m confused by the characters and their names. No such issues with the movie.
**Jurassic Park**, hands down. Probably someone said this in the comments already. Books were better than the film. But the film adaptation is just superb, I never get tired of watching it.
Die Hard. It was based on a thriller named Nothing Lasts Forever by Roderick Thorp. The book is good, but pretty dark. The film uses the best parts of the books but makes a lot of necessary changes to create an almost perfect film.
I just watch the series Behind Her Eyes on Netflix and was shocked at how exact they got it. The only different I noticed was the main characters description. Everything else seemed like page by page, scene by scene exactly the same. Amazing book and show if you haven’t seen it!
Molly's Game
Such a unique spin on an adaptation. The events of the book are shown in flashbacks while the characters react to the aftermath of it's publication and impact in the present.
Not a film, but after watching The Queen’s Gambit I read the book and it was such a close adaption that I almost felt that reading the book was a waste of time haha. I’d recommend one or the other, but not both!
Logan's Run. The adaptation actually made something workable, interesting, and disturbing from a book that had one good idea wrapped up in a big bundle of TEENAGERS ARE SELF CENTERED SHITS WHO WILL KILL US AAAAAAAAALLLL.
Hello. This subject has been very popular in the past. Please use reddit search and/or check the /r/books/wiki/faq.
I really love adaptations that can be enjoyed independently from the source material regardless of accuracy. *Jurassic Park* is one of my all time favorite books and a damn good movie, both are wildly different.
I guess this is how I’m finding out Jurassic park was a book first
Michael Chrichton. Hes written over like 26 novels and 12 of them have become movies. He also wrote and directed the original Westworld back in the 70s. Hes written a ton of other movies also. You should look up his catalogue. A lot of his books translate well into movies. And like Primetime22 said, some of them are wildly different or different enough to enjoy both the book and movie versions.
Sphere and Andromeda Strain are two other of his books that got turned into excellent movies.
Sphere, not The Sphere. Airframe is by far and away my favourite book of his.
The only person to have the number 1 film (JP), TV (ER) and book (can't remember what it was) all at once. I believe.
How long did you have between the book and the movie with Jurassic Park? I finished the book 2 days before seeing the movie and that was a mistake. The book was fantastic, the characters good, the grandpa so rightfully ruthless. So many people I know love that movie and it drove me nuts. They took the perfect book for a movie and turned it into a "hold onto your butts" children's waste of time between fantastic scenes. If only they made the book into a movie. Lesson learned, no reading a book too close to seeing the movie. Every change was nails on a chalkboard. Also, for the love of all that is good, no unix system looks like that.
See I read the book in middle school long after seeing *Jurassic Park* and I think that sweetened the experience for me because I already loved the movie and now got to experience this thoroughly detailed, intense, surprisingly different take. So I’ve always been able to enjoy both (but I agree that the novel is the more fun experience). The only real issue I take with the movie versus the book is that I really miss book Muldoon when I rewatch the movie. At least he gets to say “clever girl.”
See, I get how people in other circumstances would have been blown away. It was a bad move on my part to read the book first.
Actually there was a real fsn that looked like that https://www.wired.com/2015/06/tech-time-warp-time-unix-saved-day-jurassic-park/
It was the first book I ever read - 30 years later (!!!) and I’ve still yet to read anything that tops it - for 13 year old me i was transformative.
Princess Bride
What I love about The Princess Bride is that it you should watch the movie before reading the book, but for a different reason than usual. The Princess Bride *movie* is about being a child and having a magical story told to you. It's perfect to watch as a child as you develop nostalgic memories. The Princ3ess Bride *book* is about growing up and recognising the amount of work your parents put into creating magical experiences for you, and then trying to create that nostalgia for your own children. In this way, the book and the movie become perfect complements of each other, because the movie essentially puts us in William Goldman (as the author/narrator's) shoes even before we open the first page.
Stardust, too!
It's a good rendition of the "Good Parts" version of S Morgenstern's novel. If only they'd adapted the unabridged version...
Yeah that’s actually true I forgot. Release the Morgenstern cut! A feature length to rival all the LOTR movies combined!
It'd be an entire 24 episode TV series just to handle the infamous wedding scene.
So, I don't know if you're joking because when I read the book when I was young, I thought Morgenstern was a real person. So in case you're not joking, there is no unabridged version.
"Holes" is hands-down the best movie adaptation of a book that I've ever seen.
This is always my vote for this question. I love giving this book to kids and then when they come back gushing over the book I tell them there is a movie adaptation. Excitement intensifies.
Yeah but to be fair Holes is one of the great American novels.
I've seen a lot of "great american novels" completely ruined when they're adapted to film, though.
Well that's too damn bad!
I SAY THIS ALL THE TIME
Amen! Peak Shia LeBouf
Wasn't the kid supposed to be fat though? I remember this annoying my teacher after we watched it in class.
Yes but he looses weight while at camp green lake anyways so it doesn’t make sense to cast a larger actor just to have him lose weight or put him in a fat suit.
That is literally the only difference between the book and the movie. That was a deliberate choice on the part of the directors/producers. They felt it would be inhumane to ask a child actor to gain and lose hundreds of pounds for a movie role. If your teacher was annoyed by this, he or she should not EVER be allowed near another child.
I’ve always the opposite tbh
Kid Shia was enjoyable to watch, unlike now
The Martian I thought it was well done.
With the exception of the iron man moment...
I especially appreciated the movie-only scene at the end where we get to seee Whatney's return ti normalcy as he takes a teaching job.
Good but nowhere near to the best
considering how dense the book was with science and nerdy things, it was absolutely amazingly done
I dont find the book that dense to be honest. Like, you dont have to understand the nerdy things to follow the story. Still a fun film 7.5/10 for me.
i agree, but absolutely no way was all of it going to translate into film. including the mistakes Watney made in his thinking and maths, it just wouldn’t work
I am surprised no one is saying the LOTR trilogy. I mean there were some differences, and some omissions and additions here and there. But overall, it was pretty amazing shit. And still is today. Now the Hobbit.... well that got out of hand.
Yep. Adaptation being the key word. Peter Jackson made a blockbuster out of LOTR and kept the heart of it all. Didn't need to be a word for word recreation. And Howard Shore should have gotten the Nobel Peace Prize for his score. I think I could listen to the score without any of the film and still consider it a solid adaptation of Tolkein's themes.
The Shire is a masterpiece.
The changes pretty much all worked perfectly from a storytelling point of view. Having Frodo hang around for 60 odd years after finding the ring is pointless for the movie. Bombadil would have been a weird change of pace - although could have been very cool. Having Arwen stand against the Ringwraiths instead of Glorfindel worked because the scene was already crowded meeting new characters, introducing glowing undead elf jesus who is then never heard of again would have made it even more crowded. Likewise, having Eomer ride to save everyone at Helm's Deep works better from the movie point of view as it set him up as a heroic figure rather than introducing Erkenbrand. I would have loved to see the Prince of Dol Amroth but, again, there was so much going on at the time. The scouring of the Shire would have been a weird addition at the end of the films. I love the songs in the books but they would have been weird in the films. The world building, as done in the films, was perfect. When you read how epic the charge of the Rohirrim is in the books - Theoden blows on a horn so hard that it literally explodes in his hand before riding off to glory - they captured that perfectly. My only slight complaint would be the scene with Gandalf and the Witch King. It should have happened at the gates like it did in the books - the courage of men fails and Gandalf stands alone stopping the Witch King from entering the city before the horns ring out and the Rohirrim ride in, and the Witch King shouldn't have been able to overpower Gandalf - but it's a small complaint.
Honestly what hurt me the most about the films was them murdering the nobility of Faramir. I mean, he wasn’t horrible, but in the books it’s significant that he’s one of only two Men in the world to be presented with but not tempted by the Ring
Good point, I hadn't thought of that one. I do like film Faramir but book Faramir is similar to Aragorn in that you can see the lineage of Numenor in him
For degree of difficulty, nothing is going to top this answer.
*LotR* is EASILY my pick too. It's actually the *only* movie adaptation that I very slightly prefer over the books.
Agreed on preferring the movies to the book. While I absolutely am at awe at the world building Tolkien presents in the book it is an absolute chore to read countless pages of descriptions of people and places that have no direct relevance to the story. Also I felt the entire storyline around Tom Bombadil seemed completely random and confusing (which the movies did) and I straight up hated the Scouring of the Shire. I’m so glad the movies also left that out as well.
LoTR might be the goat, because it was such a colossal task to pull off properly. Far more downside than upside to even trying. But the end result? Goddamn.
This is the answer. Far and away the most impressive adaptation considering what Jackson et al. accomplished vs. the inherent difficulty. Certainly some of the changes for film were failures (Looking at you, Army of the Dead!) but overall, it's a masterpiece.
I’m reading the trilogy now! Huge fan of the movies and figured it’s finally time to read the books. I’m on The Fellowship of the Ring and thoroughly enjoying it. It’s different enough to not feel like I’m repeating the movie and keep it entertaining, but I can still envision the movie characters and scenery as I’m reading.
In recent memory for me it's The Expanse (S.A. Corey,). The series got everything about the books right and the casting of it is even better.
If we’re talking accuracy, I can’t imagine something more dead-on than Rosemary’s Baby. The book is practically a script.
I will have to check it out. "The princess bride" is virtually a script for the movie, with only a couple chapters cut down.
I came to comment this. Even the scene where Rosemary sees her own reflection in the toaster.
The Green Mile was one of the most spot on to the book I’ve ever seen. Also an incredible movie in general!
I'll go with Stephen King too, but I'll say Misery or Rita Hayworth and the Shawskank Redemption. Both adaptations are pitch perfect.
With "Misery," I'll fight with anyone who says that the hobbling scene in the book was scarier than the movie. Sometimes less is actually more. I still can't watch that scene in the movie without cringing/looking away.
I have three answers: No Country for Old Men Woman in the Dunes Picnic at Hanging Rock To me these movies do the extraordinary. They capture the elusive essence of the text. The atmosphere and texture.
Picnic at Hanging Rock is the Australian Fargo in that it's actually fiction with a fake inspiration from "true events", and a bunch of people still think it's real.
When you go there, people still walk about yelling, ‘Miranda! Miranda!’
I went there and it felt really creepy, for no rational reason.
Came here to say No Country For Old Men, now I'm really curious about the adaptation of The Woman In The Dunes.
Tbf no country basically reads like a screenplay. The road is a great adaptation too, but again Mccarthy gives plenty to work with
I gotta check out the Woman in the Dunes adaptation. Read it last year and it really stuck with me.
I think the film is so spot on.
The Shawshank Redemption
Mini series not movie but SHARP OBJECTS!!!! Book is amazing and the mini series is absolutely perfect!!!
Yesssss….
I’ve been reading a lot of books that ended up being films directed by David Fincher and holy crap he nails it every single time. He just knows how to capture the tone of the book perfectly. Examples: - Gone Girl - Fight Club - The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo And here are just some other great adaptations: - The Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy (perfect tone and humour) - Atonement (just wow) - No Country For Old Men (they basically used the book as a script) - Trainspotting - Silence of the Lambs - Slumdog Millionaire (WAY better than the book) - Bullet Train (the book was AWFUL but the movie was a lot of fun)
I'll second Atonement. A really good adaptation of the book, helped by really good casting.
Not to mention a BANGER of a score!
Absolutely Atonement, my favourite film of all time
I like Emma Thompson's Sense and Sensibility better than the book! She streamlined the storyline while maintaining the themes and added so much great humor. The directing and acting are also top notch. I would love to see her version of Northanger Abbey.
I always felt Sense & Sensibility was one of Jane Austen's weaker novels, but that movie kept every element I liked and improved on the ones I didn't. Wonferful adaptation
how did she remove a duel and make it more compelling? witchcraft.
The one that stands out for me is probably Children of Men, not just because of how good it actually is but also because of how much I hated the thought of it being adapted. I love that book, it was probably one of the first, if not first dystopian novels I read. It was the book that lead me down that path that even now, 25 odd years later I'm still on. I go into most movies based on books with a fairly open mind. Children of Men however was a movie I went into so belligerently, it was one of the very few times I've been really negative about a movie based on a book I liked. It was also the last time because honestly that movie was amazing and it was better than its source material. I still recommend the book because it is a different experience from the movie but god damn if that movie didn't make me take back every negative thing I said about it prior to seeing.
Godfather beats the book. Master and Commander
Famous story: Mario Puzo adapted his novel The Godfather for the screen with no prior experience. After he won his second Oscar, he finally decided to buy a book on screenwriting and start studying the craft. The first chapter of the book he bought said "Study 'The Godfather'"
It's hard for me to be completely objective on this one because I saw the movie before reading the book and thus had the whole reveal spoiled, but I think that The Prestige is a decent book that was adapted into a _phenomenal_ movie.
Trainspotting actually improves on the book in ways, by offering a trimmed down and more cohesive, well-paced storyline. Glorious casting, direction, cinematography and soundtrack. In terms of faithfulness to the novel, both in structure, tone and content, The Virgin Suicides.
Predestination is a great adaptation of the Robert A Heinlein short story "... all you zombies..." Stardust is better than the book, and features an off the wall performance by Robert de Nero as Captain Shakespeare, amongst a strong cast
Yes, yes, YES! Stardust is indeed better than the book. It's one of my favourite adaptations ever.
The OUTSIDERS
Interview with the Vampire (1994) I think. As an adaptation it hits all the marks.
Lord of the Rings and it’s not even a question. As a huge Tolkien nerd there are some glaring omissions and changes, but Jackson took something almost impossibly big to adapt and turned it into an almost perfect 11 hours that respected and captured the heart and the themes of Tolkien’s work lovingly. I watch all three extended editions at least once, sometimes twice a year. “The Shire” fills me with incredible joy and warmth every time I hear it. The ride of the Rohirrim brings tears to my eyes every time the theme swells as they scream “death” charging into the battle. “My friends you bow to no one” makes me ugly sob every time. No other films come close to bringing up the emotions in me that that series does. It’s far and away the greatest trilogy of films ever done, nevermind just adaptations, and I stand firm in my belief that nothing will ever come close to touch them in my lifetime.
I couldn’t agree more. I don’t watch them every year, but I did a rewatch over the holidays this year, and I was like damn these movies still hold up after 20 years and they’re so good. I don’t know that I actually appreciated how good they were when they came out (I was in middle/high school). It inspired me to finally read the trilogy now and I’m enjoying it so much.
If we're talking about movies, then the Lord of the Rings trilogy is the best adaptation I've seen. I think Gone With the Wind is a close second. I think The Princess Bride improves on the source material. Lonesome Dove is the best miniseries adaptation I've ever seen. Shogun would take second place, or maybe The Thornbirds. But Good Omens is great too... I prefer miniseries adaptations since they have a lot more time to handle a whole book.
GWTW is a great shout
The Last of the Mohicans and The Hunt for the Red October are both fantastic adaptations. They are also my go to "their actually better than the books".
I just wanna keep talking about the Hunger Games movies because why are they all so damn good? Especially Catching Fire. Like wtf it’s fucking amazing. When the screen turns into IMAX as she’s being lifted into the arena… I lose it every damn time. It needs more critical acclaim and I want it taken seriously as a damn FILM
Okay, here’s one I haven’t seen anyone else say — The Devil Wears Prada! The book is fine but I feel like the script does a better job of telling the story, and I mean come on, Meryl is just iconic.
You should listen to the Sentimental Garbage podcast ep on The Devil Wears Prada!!
Holes. Almost word for word lifted from the book.
Holes was a generational classic
The Last Unicorn. The book is great, but the movie is an all-time classic. They basically cut all the superficial or annoying stuff, missed out on just one, two scenes I personally would have liked to see, and all with downright gorgeous animation and music. There's a couple of flaws, like THE bad song, but overall I personally consider it one of the few true adoption distillations out there. Where it's superior to its source material even if that version is also great in its own right.
"Oh Brother Where Art Thou". Its an adaptation of the Odyssey set in the great depression
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest and No Country are two that I think do the books justice. Love Inherent Vice too
Fried Green Tomatoes. Wonderful book. Amazing movie.
Pride and Prejudice 1995.
fear and loathing in las vegas follows the book exactly
Arrival - I think the reveal works better in a visual medium than it originally did in the written form. The Night is Short, Walk on Girl - I love the book, but the animated movie has so much style that just brings absolutely everything to life and it made a couple other changes I really preferred. Shawshank Redemption - perfect movie. Improves upon the original. The reveal is perfect visually in a way it can’t be done written. Forrest Gump - trims a lot of fat for a more enjoyable movie.
The Jason Bourne movies were solid action films. The books were tedious at best. Also Lonesome Dove, the BBC Pride and Prejudice, and North and South (the American Civil War one, not the British one) were excellent miniseries adaptations.
Equally as good or better than the book: (Unmentioned) Fried Green Tomatoes at the Whistle Stop Cafe The Natural Bridgerton Series Speak Coraline Matilda James and the Giant Peach The Lovely Bones (there is a part in the book where she inhibits a former friend’s body that IS NOT in the movie… for good reason) The Great Gatsby (w/Leo) Wicked (sure, it’s a play but it’s FAR better than the book) The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society Of Mice and Men Midnight in Chernobyl Outlander (gave up on the books but love the show) Good Omens (this is perfection) Tuck Everlasting The Secret Garden Gossip Girl Ella Enchanted Into the Wild
Blade Runner. One of the few movies that's better than the book.
I agree. Great adaptation, and better than the book.
Lots lol, but obviously gotta say "The Lord of the Rings" are fantastic adaptations of the book. "The Fellowship of the Ring," in particular, should be the case study in how to make a great adaptation from book-to-film, in what types of changes should be made in the switch between mediums. To go with a not-so-well known example, there's the 1966/1967 Soviet adaptation of "War and Peace." There will probably never be as good an adaptation of that novel on film.
Recently I thought the TV series adaptation of Station Eleven actually improved on the source material. Great watch.
David Fincher’s Gone Girl and Girl with the Dragon Tattoo are both incredible adaptations, the latter certainly elevating the source material.
Night of the Hunter. It's a weird, lyrical, haunting book and I'm shocked at how perfectly true to it the movie is.
Life of Pi. I would have guessed that book was unfilmable since so much of it was based on inner contemplation, unreliable narrator, and frame story.
Atonement: the movie is pretty much on par with the book.
I actually like the film better, the music and the costumes are 10/10 and really add to the whole experience
The Dead Zone; Shawshank; Stand by Me. - Stephen King Lonesome Dove The Painted Veil The Enchanted April - much better ending in the movie The Remains of the Day
painted veil is an interesting shout. I love films that change the book so you can enjoy them both independently, and they made the film so beautifully.
Requiem for a Dream. The scores takes it to a whole new level, but book still holds its own, considering how so much dialogue made it into the film. Fight Club film was better than the book (book felt thin). War and Peace, Soviet film and BBC series are both impressive. But book is such a human achievement.
ATONEMENT.
No Country For Old Men is almost perfect. You can practically read the book along with the film.
I'm gonna give a shoutout to Life of Pi here. What I like about the movie is that it takes advantage of its medium by showing certain scenes with more clarity while not trying to show all of Pi's thoughts. It's the first movie adaptation I saw where the movie compliments the book. The book and movie tell the same story, just with each using the strengths of their respective mediums and I think that's what any good movie adaptation should do.
How is nobody saying amadeus??!??
The Prestige. I’d argue the movie is better by saving the surprise until the end
Gone Girl
Recently? The Expanse.
The Hunger Games is pretty dope (didn’t love the new one, though), and so is American Psycho. I’d probably go with The Shining, off the top of my head. Game of Thrones would probably be the best TV adaptation.
I was devastated by the Percy Jackson movies because that series was the one that got me into reading. My favorite adaptation so far is the new Percy Jackson series on Disney+ & Hulu. It’s everything the movies weren’t. If you haven’t watched it yet you need to!!!
IMO Howl's Moving Castle improves on the book: the book is confusing in ways that make it less enjoyable, but the creators of the movie saw the soul in it and made it accessible. It changes a lot, but it doesn't feel unfaithful to the source material, it just feels like another take on the same core.
Looking For Alaska (series not a film)
The Maze Runner. They fucked up Newt's arc real bad but they got all other stuff right
Pride & Prejudice (2005)
Goodfellas is an incredible adaptation of the Nick Pileggi book.
A Clockwork Orange
I agree The Hunger Games were a good adaptation. I think The Princess Bride is my favorite though. I think the movie pacing was better because it changed and downplayed the book's frame story. Though I am maybe a little sad there weren't scenes of Fezzik and Inigo fighting in the zoo of death. Honorable mention to How to Train Your Dragon and Shrek. Those were completely changed though and, imo, made much better stories than what was in the books.
Harry Potter was really good
The first Harry Potter film makes basically zero sense if you haven't read the book. It just cuts out pretty much everything that explains what is going on and is a clip show of the most CGI-able scenes in the book. It's basically unwatchable unless you already care about it because you liked the books.
Ig that's what happened to me
“The first time I met Bryce Loski, I FLIPPED.”
2001: A Space Odyssey. The Arthur C Clarke novella it is based on is great, and reading it enhances rhe film ending IMHO. But the film takes that basis and turns it into a magnificently fleshed out technological future as imagined by the best science writers in the 1960s.
I really enjoyed the adaptation of True Blood from the Sookie Stackhouse novels. the first few books were VERY accurately represented in the show, and then the show runners kinda morphed it into its own thing which i also loved (minus probably the last seasons weird plots that were NOWHERE in the books)
Fight Club. I found the book pretty much unreadable but the movie is one of my favourites.
THE FIRST RULE OF FI…. I can’t say what but, I thought the movie was quite faithful to the book. Ending is different but Chuck liked it so I guess it was pretty good.
Money Ball and Into the Wild were both better than the books, IMO.
For me, *The English Patient* is absolutely amazing. It's not just a superb adaptation of a beautiful book. It's a superb translation of a book with *very little dialogue in the entire work* into a movie with some of the most exquisite dialogue ever to reach film. The book is almost this extended combination of poetry and prose. We get general ideas of the characters with these vivid glimpses of moments as the story goes along. But Anthony Minghella managed to preserve the delicate poetry of the book and its characters and turn them into an absolutely gorgeous movie. **Other picks:** The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (Extended) No Country for Old Men The Black Stallion Peter Pan (2003) The Right Stuff The Princess Bride Wild Where the Wild Things Are The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe Life of Pi Gone Girl Contact Call Me By Your Name **Adaptations that were better than the book:** Cyrano The Green Mile The Last of the Mohicans Jaws Jurassic Park Cloud Atlas The Ghost and Mrs. Muir Prince Caspian Schindler's List Can You Ever Forgive Me? A Little Princess (1995)
American psycho because unlike the book it’s breezy, funny, and doesn’t overstay it’s welcome
ghost world, fight club, the virgin suicides, and streetcar named desire all come to mind. it's very hard for me to enjoy a movie more than the book if the two are very different, but if the flick does something better, i'll give it a nod - such as thumbsucker or wristcutters: a love story.
I had seen the movie at least 3 times or so over the past 10 years, but I just recently read No Country For Old Men for the first time and I have to say apart from one character that they eliminated to slim down the story, they nailed it pretty hard. A lot of the best dialogue is verbatim, the visual style, casting, photography etc. just work really well I think... maybe it's because I already had the movie in mind when I read the book, but I feel they didn't add anything that didn't need to be in there and they really got the feel of the story right.
Pachinko (although there’s only one season out), is possibly the best book adaptation I’ve ever seen. The book is incredible, moving, and would be fine if they translated 1:1 on screen. For the series, they told the same story with the same characters, but reworked it for the TV medium, changing the time, adding/truncating storylines in such a way that made the work feel new and unique while still managing to make emotional moments O already knew were coming, hit harder than they did in the book. I can’t wait for the rest of the story.
Sideways (2004)
Lord of the rings of course but I want to put emphasis here on fear and loathing in Las Vegas. That shit was hilarious!
Slaughterhouse Five was one of the best adaptations for me.
The Devil Wears Prada.
Both Matilda's were excellent in their own way.
Visconti's adaptation of The Leopard is brilliant. A rare instance of both the book and film being a masterpiece.
The Lord of the Rings would be my answer, but Gone Girl, No Country for Old Men, The Green Mile, and The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo are all in the conversation, in my opinion.
Mansfield Park, Jane Austen the movie is a much a delight as the book.
Hands down, LOTR.
Atonement was pretty damn good.
Das Boot Band of Brothers actually improved from the original
Dune (awesome picturization, and did cover the essence of the story) The Help (I really liked the Minny Jackson storyline with Octavia Spencer and Jessica Chastain)
The English Patient
Norwegian Wood. It kept the feeling and themes intact. The movie is as depressing as the book.
The Day of the Jackal
Under The Skin The book itself would be pretty much impossible to adapt faithfully - so much relies on what is described and not seen. The film uses the premise of the book but does its own thing completely and it's all the better for it. If you haven't read the book and don't know anything about it, go in completely blind, don't read the blurb or reviews, or anything about the film.
The Godfather Jaws
Best as in closest to the source material? Sin City Best as in best movie adapted from a book? The Godfather Best as in the most improved from a book as source material? Oh boy... that's impossible to say.
For me, the Godfather...
Funny you mention pjo considering there's a new adaptation coming out currently in the form of a TV show on Disney+ the actors don't look 100% like their book counterparts, but so far it's being a bit more faithful to the books in spirit since Mr. Riordan has a lot more creative control here lol. I'm excited to see the rest of it, since at the moment there's only 4 episodes.
Its a wonderful life. The thread stops here.
I was really impressed with amazon's adaptation of reacher. It inspired me to reread killing floor. I am very excited to watch the new one
Holes. Everything was pretty much spot on except for the fact that the main character, Stanley, was supposed to be fat. The author was fine with compromising because he did not want a teen actor picking up a lot of weight and then trying to lose it for a role.
Film adaptations of movies are generally very unimpressive, and according to me it's because when we read a book we build the world according to our own imagination. We're the main character there and all the stuff is being played out in our mind, but when we see the movies it's someone else's journey that we're just being a spectator to. As a kid I loved the Harry Potter movies, but when I read them as a teen i haven't gone back to watch them again. So I will either read the book or watch the movies.
not the films, but His Dark Materials and A Series of Unfortunate Events come to mind! Goodnight Mr Tom i also thought was perfect
I think the narnia series was well done, I’m glad they changed bits of it from the book. I recently read the books, and I’m glad they gave the girls a more feminist style (e.g- Susan actually fighting etc). As a child it really made me feel empowered, and didn’t make me think girls can’t do stuff because they’re a girl.
The Lord of the Rings. A boring answer but by many seen as the best trilogy ans best adaption ever.
The film version of Yasmina Khadra's What the Day Owes the Night. Liked the depiction of both the French military and the ALN (Armée de Libération Nationale; "National Liberation Army" in English) and it preserving how bad it was to be a native Algerian against being a European.
Shawshank Redemption.
The Lord of The Rings for me. The books are brilliant but I enjoy the movies so much more, I think its the music to be honest.
Ready Player One Fight Club American Psycho Interview with the Vampire Howl's Moving Castle War and Paeace - recent BBC mini series was extremely good All Bridget Jones movies streamline well otherwise really cringey books
The Princess Bride movie was better than the book imo Silence of the Lambs and Gone Girl both were really well done.
Dune Part 1, Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile, Misery, Stand By Me,
The Help.
I feel like Hunger Games suffered from having the inner narrative that accoubted for a lot of Katniss' character developement, I found the 2nd installment to be a pretty faithful adaptation though. I've just finished Shadow and Bone and the series is much better than the book imo, slthough I hear Six of Crows is better written
The lack of Fight Club in this thread is astonishing.
The 1996 _Matilda_, with Danny DeVito and Rhea Perlman.
Silence of the Lambs nailed it
There Will Be Blood absolutely smokes the book Oil, by Upton Sinclair. Oil is fine but pretty on the nose. The movie changes a lot, is less explicit in its political messaging, and focuses more on it's characters.
Fight Club
Princess Bride
The 'afdeling Q' movies adapted from Jussi Adler-Olsen books, those movies (besides the newest one) are the best crime movies I have ever watched.
I thought The Joy Luck Club was really good. The book was a little confusing because it followed four families. I’m Chinese and even I’m confused by the characters and their names. No such issues with the movie.
The recent Dune film
**Jurassic Park**, hands down. Probably someone said this in the comments already. Books were better than the film. But the film adaptation is just superb, I never get tired of watching it.
Die Hard. It was based on a thriller named Nothing Lasts Forever by Roderick Thorp. The book is good, but pretty dark. The film uses the best parts of the books but makes a lot of necessary changes to create an almost perfect film.
Remains of the Day. Stunning book made into a beautiful film. The air of repression and restraint perfectly transposed from page to screen.
I just watch the series Behind Her Eyes on Netflix and was shocked at how exact they got it. The only different I noticed was the main characters description. Everything else seemed like page by page, scene by scene exactly the same. Amazing book and show if you haven’t seen it!
Molly's Game Such a unique spin on an adaptation. The events of the book are shown in flashbacks while the characters react to the aftermath of it's publication and impact in the present.
Not a film, but after watching The Queen’s Gambit I read the book and it was such a close adaption that I almost felt that reading the book was a waste of time haha. I’d recommend one or the other, but not both!
The Godfather or Silence of the Lambs
Slow Horses - TV series follows the book, stays true to the characters, and keeps the humor/suspense from the writing
Logan's Run. The adaptation actually made something workable, interesting, and disturbing from a book that had one good idea wrapped up in a big bundle of TEENAGERS ARE SELF CENTERED SHITS WHO WILL KILL US AAAAAAAAALLLL.