I agree with Francesco about books being richer than movies. Normally you don't notice the details while watching a movie. While reading you need to use your imagination to figure out the scene and sometimes the actors from the movie are disappointing because they don't come off as well as is in the books. Game of Thrones was better as a series though.

For me, "The Da Vinci Code" movie adaptation was awful.  The book was alright but the movie missed so many parts.  

I liked the movie and the Constantine series, but the HQ is much better.

I read "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" for a book report in high school and had never seen the movie.  Such was my reputation, that my English teacher did not believe I did the report based off the book. So, she asked me the one question that differentiates the book from the movie..."How did Cheswick die".  She smiled when I answered correctly, like her faith in humanity had been restored.

Anyhoo...I saw the movie years later. The book was better, and so was my story that went with it.

I don't have time to read much anymore unfortunately but the last time I read a book that became a movie was The Da Vinci code and Angels and Demons.   Definitely think the books were better as is the case with most books turned movies.   

Eragon - the book was good. The movie was HORRIBLE. The only thing they got right was character names. Descriptions were off. Abilities were wrong. By the power of the elves it was WRONG!

The Stand loved that book was very disappointed with the movie/series the same with IT with the exception of Tim Curry cast as Pennywise.

While the movie adaptation of The Book Thief was decent, I feel like the issue of having a such a difficult narrator explore the thoughts of the main characters was too much of a hurdle. I also think some significant details were left out, but again (probably) due to narration constraints

One that really sticks out is "I hope they serve beer in hell" by Tucker Maxx.

Now, this stuff is meant to be comedy.  It was low level (both the book and the movie) and not exactly literary genius, but the book was BY FAR better than the movie.

I've come to grips with my innate desire to see every detail and word of a book on film. Films and books are different mediums, and thus they will never give the same, exact experience. Translating a 1000 page novel into a 2 hour movie will never be able to provide every single plot thread. Something will have to be dropped and added for the betterment of the movie goer's experience and understanding. 

Still there are some awful adaptations. The first Hobbit film was pretty good, but the next two were atrocious since they undercut the central theme of the novel by shoehorning Legolas into Bilbo's underdog to hero arc.

The Percy Jackson films were pretty bad, but funnily enough I loved them when I watched them before reading the book. After reading the books, I remembered liking the movie but forgot the entire film. So, I was excited to watch it and when I did, I literally was so devastated. 

Anna Karenina's adaptations really get under my skin  because my favorite character was Alexei Karinin and they always change things to make him more of a villain, when he's really a hero and a victim. I understand not everyone likes Alexei, but one film twisted his orphaned backstory and gave it to Anna just to make him less likable and her more likable. I think this shows what really makes me upset. You can take away an unnecessary scene or adapt a film and focus on a lesser developed plot in the book. Treasure Planet is one of my favorite adaptations because it takes something familiar, throws it into space, and focuses on the fatherly relationship of the character. It doesn't just redo the book, because at that point... why not just read the book? Now, while there should be change, don't just undergird the author's original intentions and do the complete opposite message. If you're going to do that, make your own film with your own characters.

The Jungle Book live action shocked me because it takes the characters and plot then guts the moral lesson entirely. In the original, it's about a boy learning to be a man and taking responsibility. You can't be a child forever. However, in this adaptation, he does the literal opposite, stays in the jungle, and its everyone else, who raised him, whose wrong. He can stay in his childhood home forever. 

Well, anyway, that's my essay because daily hustle said post something. 

I loved Tuck Everlasting as the book. Bridge to Terabithia was another great one. The movies were meh in terms of movies but always the books were better. Another group was of course the Harry Potter series.

World War Z. Pretty sure they just liked the name lol. I hope for an anthology-type TV series based on it someday. It's such a variety pack of a story, written from so many perspectives, and there are parts I still think about from time to time, years later.

from a thousand books that are actually better than the movie, i must say that "abraham lincoln - the vimpire hunter" jumps straight on my mind. Reading the book was awesome, extremely well written etc, but the movie was a total disaster. really got me pissed.

Where to start...

- the book thief

- the boy in the striped pyjamas

- all of the Robert Langdon series

- all of the Narnia series

- lord of the flies

- the great gatsby

- the hobbit

- eat, pray, love <3

i could go on all day :P

Well I was going to say all of the Tolkien books but everyone else seems to have covered that! The Invisible Man book by HG Wells was much better than the movie that is for sure.

Some years ago I read the book Sleepers from 1995 by Lorenzo Carcaterra after I wacthed the movie. and the book was much better then the movie.

The movie was good with good actors but it was much better to use my mind too get what was been done to them 

Enders Game. I wanted the movie to be good soooo badly. And while I loved what they did do, it was the first time I've ever thought a book truly needed to be 2 separate movies. Because they skimmed over so much of the substance of the book to get the story into a single movie.