50 Shades of Grey.
The film is silly and mediocre but the book is next level terrible.
this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2024
80 points (100.0% liked)
Asklemmy
1452 readers
61 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy π
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I've never consumed either media of that story. But I thoroughly enjoyed Dan Olson's take.
Yep. This is probably the best take of showing how the movie's writing process changed the writing for the better, then the books' author put a stop to that.
Just so you know, everything in that link after ?si= is purely tracking information so Google can know who you send links to, and when they open them.
Thanks, forgot to delete that.
Thank you. I ended up watching the whole trilogy (of videos).
its twilight fanfiction
Harry Potter, the movies are at least wizards do wizard stuff even if the world is pretty boring to me. The books on the other hand, are just straight up strange and mean. Reading them as kid they just sucked, I have no clue why they are so popular outside of the movies.
What do you mean by strange and mean?
Thereβs a lot of moments where the characters will laugh at or make fun of someone for something to a degree I would never do irl, or the slave bit with hermione. The characters also just donβt evolve at all. Reading Harry Potter just gave me a fish out of water feeling, there were better magic books with characters that actually grew and changed.
The lord of the rings!
I love reading....I read a lot. But Tolkien's style just never worked for me, the movies were great.
I agree with thus, I tried the books and got pages in before abandoning them, the movies are well done
I liked most of the books, but I hate the long songs. Maybe this is a hot take but authors should not put in songs longer than a few lines.
I always skip a song that is more than a few (max 5) lines long
I've started reading Jumper by NameDoesNotMatter. I would like to formally apologise about all the harsh things I've ever spoken about that film.
Fine, the cast is unlikeable and the action scenes are just fisticuffs in the air, but my god, in comparison to the teenage dreck that is the book, it's a masterpiece. At least they tried to build a credible back story for the main character.
In the book, he literally thinks everyone is out to sexually assault him (and somehow they seem to want to), he solves his problems by throwing money at it, instead of any actual creativity, and the author desperately tries to portray him as a mature-for-his-age adult, despite the fact that his first reaction to anything is crying followed by petty revenge.
I'm just flicking through the pages, pausing at any plot bits, and then flicking on.
Fight Club, book is decent but the film seems a more complete package.
Even Chuck Palahniuk agrees.
Now that I see the movie, especially when I sat down with Jim Uhls and record a commentary track for the DVD, I was sort of embarrassed of the book, because the movie had streamlined the plot and made it so much more effective and made connections that I had never thought to make.
Source: https://www.dvdtalk.com/interviews/chuck_palahniuk.html
Jaws doesn't quite fit the prompt but although it's a good movie, the book is essentially a sub-par beach read. And there was no USS Indianapolis monologue in the book.
Stuart Little was the weirdest book you could possibly read, the movie managed to make it actually make sense while both were meh.
Hey now, I read Jumper as a teenager and it was one of my favorite books... Admittedly, adult me has never gone back and read it so maybe you're right, but I have read the sequels and I thought they were okay. The fourth one has Danny and Millie's daughter teleporting into Low Earth Orbit and using a bunch of real life space and satellite communications technology, which was cool because I consult in that industry and so it was like "Hey! I know what she's doing and that would work!" or even "I have a client who's working on something just like that!"
It doesn't fit the prompt because they're actually both really good, but the movie Contact is better than the book. Carl Sagan wrote in a very rambley, wordy way (kinda like how he talked). He spends like two and a half pages describing Palmer Joss's tattoos or Ellie Arroway's hair. So much of the stuff in it is so cool, but it's very hard to read. I've tried three or four times in my life, and I've ended up skipping around and just reading random parts of the story.
I can see that. Maybe as a teen I would have clicked with the style more. As an adult it just feels like I'm reading a twilight fanfic.
Never read Contact. Maybe it's time!
I could not disagree more about Contact. I read the book first. I found it to be an incredibly realistic depiction of what contact with alien life might look like. The clashing of world powers, science, and religion are central themes. The movie slimmed down the story as you would expect, but they completely changed the message at the end. The book ends with Ellie finding actual evidence for some divine being which eliminates her conflict with faith. The world governments had already been forced to cooperate much more. Now with the final conflict resolved, it's implied that humanity can move forward in a more unified direction. The movie has her just believe in God, more or less. The Christians were right...
I'm gonna mention "How to train your dragon". I actually preferred the books, but they are very different and I know many people who much prefer the movie.
Howl's Moving Castle. Not that I didn't enjoy the book, I just preferred the movie more.
Same. I remember the book being actually kind of unimpressive and wondering "Really, this is what inspired that amazing movie?"
This is a show and not a movie, but definitely The Magicians. The show is pretty incredible, and more or less abandons everything wrong with the original. The books mostly spend way too many pages following all the MC's petty grievances, and he's like a massive incel.
Oh, interesting! I may have to give the series a shot, then - I pretty much hate-read the books, hoping at first that he would get better and then later hoping that someone would just fucking kill him lol
Yessss, that's exactly how I felt! I only even forced myself to finish it so I'd feel qualified to write a terrible review lol
The classic would be fight club, I think even the author has said they enjoyed some of the symbolism that was added.
Havenβt read the book, but watched a guy discuss the differences between The Devil Wears Prada and the movie.
His contention was that there were absolutely no redeeming traits about Miranda in the book and she had somehow failed upwards with no true talent. Andy the protagonist spends the whole time rebelling against the magazine and its people.
In the movie we see Miranda to be a horrid person but we see that overlays a keen eye and talent that has led her to the top. Moreover, Andy spends effort to fit in with the magazine people and she evolves as a character.
That's a good example. A filmmaker saw a 2D character and added a layer to save the story
Hunt for Red October though film wasn't bad at all, but the book was mediocre, boring and offputting.
Battlefield Earth. The movie is awful but it's a much smaller time commitment than the book.
My partner hateread Where The Crawdads Sing, but we havenβt seen the film, so probably that.
maybe shrek? i never cared for the book though its not bad
Dine. The book is terrible, I couldn't read it at all after trying twice... way back decades ago, the recent movie was good.
My spouse says "Stardust" the book is nowhere near as good as "Stardust" the movie. We both love the movie, but it's surprising the book wasn't nearly as good.