More Movies to discuss

Uh oh! Two of my favorite Stephen King books/movies have been mentioned!

'Shawshank Redemption' was phenomenal ~ one of the few times where I liked the movie ending better than the book. 'The Green Mile' ~ I really don't know what to say about this one.....My one copy of the book is dog-eared from so many readings ~ this sounds corny, but I'd really just like to give Mr. King a big hug for that one.

My very brief comments on the ones I've seen:

The one I like best is Amores Perros. Tough, deep and true.
Even if it's a bit melodramatic, I throughly enjoyed Dead Poets' Society.
Next comes I Am Sam. Great performance by Penn. Good story. I cried in one scene.
Following that, A Beautiful Mind, intriguing, well made.
The Shawshank Redemption is a film without flaws. Almost everybody likes it. It was able to do that without giving any concessions.
I saw the newer version of The Lord of the Flies. It was OK. They say Peter Brook's version is far better.
As for The Fisher King, I think it was vain and pretentious. Did not like it at all.

'Green Mile' is definately one of the good ones from King. Usually, his stuff strikes me as a bit draggy, though technically well written.

I refer to the book. I didn't get around to the movie.

Loved The Green Mile. One of Tom Hanks' best roles. Haven't read a Stephen King book in years. And, speaking of books, I know I've seen one version of Lord of the Flies which didn't impress me much. William Golding's novel, on the other hand, is superb. It's almost too good to be made into a movie. The undertones, the examination of the nature of evil, are things cannot be expressed well on the screen.

Very true, Merry Andrew.
A book has a way of transcending someone into their own universe, looking deeper into the context of the subject matter. Instead of watching a movie with fake emotions being potrayed by actors, where movies are out there to entertain the Society, thus to make money and try to achieve high ratings. When you look at the work of an Author with their words on paper it shows more his persona and where he comes from. Instead of watching an allteration of someones thoughts from their soul being tried to put into an action sequence.

So you're saying that books are always better than movies..?

Re: More Movies to discuss
1. Dead Poets Society - Interesting but I don't get the big deal about a teacher being fired for being an iconoclast. That must happen everyday. But the way the teacher connected with his students was beautiful.

2. I am Sam - Nice movie, Sam should not have gotten custody IMO. In real life things aren't so rosy.

3. A beautiful Mind - I thought it was a pretty poor film about someone who I feel has an exagerated reputation.

4.The Fisher King - Didn't see it.
5.Amore Peros - didn't see it.
6.Once Were Warriors - didn't see it

7.The Shawshank Redemption - Touchy feely huggy but one of the best stories made into a film of all time. One of my favorites.

8. The Green Mile - Fantastic film. Poignant in many parts. Great casting as well (subsequently great acting).

9. The Salton Seas - didn't see
10.The Lord of the Flies - disn't see


I'm going to see a movie tonight, hope it will be good.

edit: I think books are always better than movies for simpler reasons:

Books use your imagination, not the imagination based on the interpretation of an individual (the director). Your imagination is a more powerful medium to paint on than is film.

Books can go into more detail than can movies, they simply don't have the same limitations. Books can also deal with thought and movies have a hard time doing that.

I agree with everything you just stated
Authors paint their personal thoughts on a invisible canvas which in turn is to become partialy uninvisible hence the first words begin to flow into the veins of the reader, which either promote a healthy reaction, or a allergic reaction causing a death of the person that holds the book in their hands, thus bringing them to a point of an unwelcome pressence in the mind. For only the actual Author himself knows, or should I say see's what is on the real canvas. We are only here as mere interpeter's or translators. For they all lay subliminal msg's throught their work. Take for example The Plague, Les' Miserables, The Idiot, Crime and Punishment, and Esecially all Of Franz Kafka's Works.

Stephen King once said that his ultimate goal is to make someone die of a heart attack from one of his books. He said that he'd feel sorry for the person but still be satisfied on some level.

To Sozobe
I do believe that in most cases books are better than movies, though it depends on, the fact if you have ever actually read the book or short story that the movie originated from, and actualy several movies can be quite moving, and make you wish/search to see where they originated from. Oppennig a door to influence you to seek out more. Also there are times wher you just want to take a break and get away from the books. Where you can pop in a movie instead of the dramatic news, and curl up nice and toasty, sit back and relax to escape the thoughts of a hard days work or a stressed mind. I do not discredit movies themselves or state that in all situations books are better, it depends on the person and what they are looking for.

Yeah, I definitely have gritted my teeth through some movie adaptations of favorite books for that reason. Haven't been able to being myself to see "The English Patient", for example, even though it's supposed to be quite good. Not sure if I'll see "Possession." (Has anyone seen that yet?)

I think that the advantage of books over movies, is that they force you to use your imagination. In a film, you are given the Director's conception of the scene, the action, the way the characters look. When you read a book YOU are the Director.

Are books better than movies?

That's a tricky subject. A first-class film director can make a gem of a movie out of a dog of a book. Something that is tortuous to read can become fascinating to watch.

Problem is, a really good book is likely to disappoint as a movie, because the book can offer so much more. As Phoenix has already said, a book forces you to use your imagination whereas the movie presents the story as the movie-maker has imagined it. But there's more to it than that. Some books aren't great just because of the plot and the characters. They're good readong because they're good writing. All the movie can offer is a visual representation of the plot and characters and even that is filtered through the imagination of the director and squeezed into an acceptable time-frame by the director.

I don't think that the question of book v. movie is answerable. The thing to remember is that a movie has to be judged on its own merits, not compared to its sourece -- the book.

(And I say that, full well realizing I just committed that sin by what I said about my feelings towards Lord of the Flies, above.)

If given a choice I try to see a film based on a book before I see the film - since, in my experience, the book tends to be a much richer experience than the film, and I seem to be disappointed if I do it the other way around.

Most folks, I think, would have a problem following that routine, Deb.

So you try to see a film BEFORE you see the film?
If I had the choice I´d read a book before I read the book.Teasing you a tad,dlowan.
I´ve ALWAYS been disappointed by cinematic adaptions of books.
One dog of a film :Smillas Sense Of Snow-based in my town.The movie was SO awful-I got the book out of the library after I´d seen it (film) on TV but had to stop half way through the 2nd chapter because I visualized Bille Augusts version instead of what no doubt would have been a much finer personal one.I feel as if I´ve totally missed out too.
An old,salivating,limping dog of a film

When you get a free minute, dlowan, would you tell me how you do that? I'd like to try it myself. Thanx.

Well, I am happy that you have all had so much chortlement at my expense!

Hebba - the trap you mention is one I had thought of - but, if I love the book, the unwanted image seems to go away.

I should have stuck with it I suppose.