I know I need to get over it, but I’m on this huge Twilight kick this week, having just rented (and subsequently purchased) the movie. No question: I loved it. I loved it as much as the book, even.
This has me wondering: what makes a good book to movie? Should the movie stay as true as possible to the novel itself? Should it take on a life of its own?
The truth is, and I explained this in my blog last week, if I see a movie made from a novel before reading the actual book, I tend to prefer the movie adaptation. On the flip side, if I’ve read the book before watching the movie, I usually consider the novel my “favorite.”
Instances where this rule applies:
The Notebook, A Walk to Remember, and The Wizard of Oz (in these cases, I watched the movies before reading the books. Obviously, I enjoyed the books, too, but if I had to pick between the movie and the book, I’d go with the movie).
On the flip side:
Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist, How to Deal, and Speak (all instances where I read the books first, then watched the movies. All good adaptations, but I’ll always prefer the books.)
Then . . . there are the movies that beat all odds: like Twilight. Loved the book. Loved the movie. It defies all logic.
How do you feel about books made into movies? If you read the novel first, do you find the movie version disappointing? Or . . . if you’ve seen a movie and just *had* to run out and buy the book on which it was based, does it live up to your expectations?
Seen any good books to movie adaptations lately?
Comments
1 Jennifer Hubbard // Apr 15, 2009 at 4:47 pm
I thought the movie of Sachar’s HOLES was quite well done, and that was after reading the book first! Generally if I’ve read a book first, I don’t like the movie, but this was an exception.
Leave a Comment