Author Topic: Books vs their media counterparts  (Read 79 times)

Offline Nekobaghira

  • Administrator
  • X-Man Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 13209
Books vs their media counterparts
« on: October 11, 2019, 03:07:40 PM »
Most of the time books are better than the movie or TV show.
https://www.barnesandnoble.com/blog/6-reasons-the-book-is-almost-always-better-than-the-movie/


The link gives the six reasons why its mostly true via Barnes and Noble. I think as media consumption continues to grow, this is not nearly as true as maybe 30 years ago.
Where the money would be is those who are able to take a source material and successfully adapt it.

Not everyone successfully adapts the source material well.

Since we're comic oriented, I'll stick to comic books that have been adapted.


League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. It was made into a movie released in 2003. The concept for the film was brilliant. And for the comic book.  However, it was poorly adapted and the source material was awful. This would be one of those cases where someone should have stepped and done a better job with the material.

The Invisible man was completely a disgusting character in the book. The movie cleaned him up as best they could. The bottom line is nobody in a theater would have rooted for him as a 'hero type'.

The studio added Dorian Grey and Mark Twain (his inclusion was because the movie was deemed too British). Neither character was in the book and sadly they were the most interesting to me in the film. The film flopped but I did buy the book it was based on to learn, that I'll never blindly buy a book based on a movie or TV show ever again. I'm not kidding about how put off due to the Invisible man.

The thing with books is the material is not limited. And as society changes some subject material is less acceptable but its a book so ... it gets a pass? I don't know.


Umbrella Academy - the TV show was adapted really well. There were a lot of things that had too change to make it work and fit a small budget for a streaming service and studio. Number 4/Klaus the most changed because it wasn't practical. It was also would not have been wise for Number 5 to do certain thing. And they couldn't really pull off the look for Number7/Vanya. I looked into the book and no, I'm not reading that.


As streaming is becoming a bigger thing and Hollywood trying to find the next best thing, having to have a block buster as many weekends in a row or what not. Audiences are fickle.

As Ice noted in the other thread, movies not cutting it are immediately removed from the theater. Making room for the next film with hopes by Hollywood they've got something.

Look at Xmen: Dark Phoenix, it got pulled after the first week because it tanked. Now, here is a case where the source material wasn't horrible. It was a classic tale in the Xmen book but it was so poorly adapted it was just utter junk.


Anyway, these are just examples, not necessarily talking points. Just showing in my view how the book is not always better.


Discuss if you want. :)
« Last Edit: October 11, 2019, 03:09:59 PM by Nekobaghira »

Offline RomeoSvengali

  • X-Man Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 1396
Re: Books vs their media counterparts
« Reply #1 on: October 12, 2019, 12:29:45 AM »
All the G.I. Joe animated series and films have never faithfully adapted the comic from 1982 and sadly with the Snake-Eyes solo film coming, there once again ignoring the source material and just going for a typical predicable Hollywood plot with wokeness thrown in. The only thing that has come close to G.I. Joe and Transformers was a CGI fan film called G1JOE2012.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Inl9LMaOGAw

The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles film from 1990 had a perfect mix of the 1984 comic and the 1987 cartoon. Although, when it comes to the character of Casey Jones, the 87 series has been the only version to come close to the source material.

The film that came the closes to I Am Legend was The Last Man On Earth from 1964, even though the author didn't like that film, but the other two adaptations, The Omega Man and I Am Legend from 2007 didn't come close to the book.

While the War of the Worlds movie from 1953 was a much more enjoyable film to watch than the one from 2005, but neither were accurate to the book since it original took place in Europe during the mid 1890s and the aliens were in walking machines, but that would have been very difficult to do back in the 50s. There is a much more faithful adaptation but that's a very low budget film... and it shows.

Hades, the character in general from Greek mythology, his adaptation in films, TV, animation, and video games has not been good. From Disney's 1997 film Hercules, the God of War series, the DC animated films Justice League Unlimited and Wonder Woman, the Percy Jackson film, Clash of the Titans remake and Once Upon A Time... he's pretty much the Greek version of Satan... and that's not who Hades is. He's by no means a saint and while there are many different versions of Greek mythology, but most didn't write him being anything close to evil.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMeNMdLMVN0

The only adaptations that I can think of that at least came close to accurately depicting him was Animated Tales of the World - The Myth of Persephone and the TV series Hercules, episode The Other Side and that was a 90s action/comedy series.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrmQYsMnl14
https://vimeo.com/220765910

When it comes to Dracula...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9D74m628gQ

When it comes to film adaptations that I found better than the book, that I can think of right now, would be The Last of the Mohicans from 1992, I found the book unreadable.
http://twain.lib.virginia.edu/projects/rissetto/offense.html
« Last Edit: October 12, 2019, 12:49:14 AM by RomeoSvengali »
https://vimeo.com/49613968
-Romeo Svengali (Monican swordsman)

Offline Nekobaghira

  • Administrator
  • X-Man Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 13209
Re: Books vs their media counterparts
« Reply #2 on: October 12, 2019, 12:22:08 PM »
Whats weird about Dracula is the studios not knowing what to do with the character. Either he's evil, which he has been most of movie or TV adaptations but now they want him to be anti-hero. Dracula Untold 2014 was the attempt.

With Vampires seemly likeable in pop culture along with all of the other supernatural creatures, the takes will be different.

I suppose Twilight had something to do with that.


My fav TV show has some flaws. Lots of them in fact. But I think what the show runners and writers room did with the show (Shadowhunters) was far better than the source material. While its based on books that are over decade old, the stuff in those books would not work on TV or in film now. The film based on the book bombed, thus canceling the other two that was suppose to be made.

The show runners for Shadowhunters made a shell and kept some elements while changing a lot of others. It's caused an interesting divide with the fan base. I don't even know how the characters I like from the TV show would be likable at all in the books. It's completely baffling.

 I read comparisons now before vesting in a book that inspired a movie or TV show. I can't waste money like that to be so disappointed.

Agreed with the treatment of Hades. I never liked the Percy Jackson stuff anyway. I did like the voice actor for the Disney film (Hercules).

Sometimes TV or Movies will create content that becomes book material. Harley Quinn was invented by the animated Batman series, then became a character in the DCU books.

Heroes didn't have a comic book until after the show was airing. The comic books were okay. They were meant to fill in gaps.


I think Agatha Christie's stuff was adapted well, (Miss Marple and Hercule Poirot) and books are better but I think that is because there is more detail to the murder mystery than there is time allowed in film or TV.

Sherlock Holmes would be exception too, I think. They did well with the movies.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2019, 07:48:01 PM by Nekobaghira »

Offline RomeoSvengali

  • X-Man Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 1396
Re: Books vs their media counterparts
« Reply #3 on: October 12, 2019, 07:18:03 PM »
Speaking of content that become book material, Batman The Animated Series gave Mr. Freeze a new origin, it turned out to be so popular, that it became canon in the comics and just about every media uses it. The best one so far was the Arkham video game series, since he was able to be with his wife, if only for a short time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sTkWBATdNI

The first Superman film, the look they gave Zod, Ursa and Non, they didn't look like that in the comics, but after the film, that became there stander appearance. Faora's look in Man of Steel was changed to look more like Ursa (black clothing and short black hair) than how she first appeared in the 1970s. But there is content that I hope never becomes book material and there's too much to list for that.

The manga series Lone Wolf & Cub was turned into a film trilogy in the 70s, but it was never finished, it was mostly accurate to the manga books, but the actor for the main lead didn't look like the character, didn't really act like him and his acting was so, so. There was also a 70s TV series that was not only far closer to the source material, but the actor looked more like the character, acted more like him and gave a better performance. The TV series didn't adapt every single story since the manga is a very long series, but they adapted the most important storylines that defined the characters.

The first film adaptation of Golgo 13 from 1973 was more accurate and the actor Ken Takakura looked more like the character since his likeness was based off him. They did another film, this time with actor Sonny Chiba in 1977 and it just wasn't the same. The manga Crying Freeman was made into an animated miniseries and it was almost page for page accurate to the source material, there have been 3 live action films (2 from 1990 and 1 from 1995), but all 3 barely tried and were not very good.

The Time Machine film from 1960 made some changes, but I didn't mind them and it's still far more enjoyable to watch than the remake. Total Recall from 1990 was loosely based off We Can Remember It for You Wholesale. But again, I didn't mind the changes and I wasn't going to bother with the remake from 2012.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2019, 07:21:07 PM by RomeoSvengali »
https://vimeo.com/49613968
-Romeo Svengali (Monican swordsman)

Offline Nekobaghira

  • Administrator
  • X-Man Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 13209
Re: Books vs their media counterparts
« Reply #4 on: October 12, 2019, 08:04:15 PM »
There is or was a TV show, I don't know its fate (continued or canceled), that I watched two episodes of and it stunk. It was awful. And its book counter part was horrendous too. Now, it could be stated that it wasn't adapted well. But I looked up the book and it stunk too. LOL

Hollywood and studios are now finding themselves trying to make stuff and provide entertainment when they don't have enough original stuff to actually accomplish their goal. They're desperate to fill the streaming thing, they want viewers.


I honestly think at this time, they need more creative ideas. But now, the money factor is in place. Its gonna get ugly.

Edit: Look at Disney .. they aren't doing anything 'new'.  They are re-doing their films. That says something.

The model needs to change, IMO.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2019, 08:11:38 PM by Nekobaghira »

Offline anya

  • X-Man Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 1166
Re: Books vs their media counterparts
« Reply #5 on: October 13, 2019, 03:51:08 PM »
I remember reading the original Dracula novel in high school and yeah, it was kinds boring. I think it was considered ‘groundbreaking’ in the 1800’s because vampires weren’t really much of a thing back then, so this was fairly new. There were more vampire type stories in Eastern Europe, but they were more like ‘zombies’ then what we think of vampires. I think I remember an article that said Dracula didn’t really take off until a stage play of the novel was made and the costume designer put Count Dracula in a tuxedo, like other European nobility would wear. So that made the character the powerful, suave and attractive ‘monster.’ That’s the version that ended up in the movies and carried into the modern era.  So that might be a case of the ‘movie’ improving on the book. ;)