The book is mostly always better than the movie, though that doesn’t mean that the movies are any less good. The movie adaptations of books have a high standed that they have to achieve for fans of the books and most of the time they succeed in bringing to screen these books.
The Harry Potter movies brought to life J.K. Rowlings characters and though some parts in the books are not in the film, they are just as magical in telling the story of the boy who lived.
Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code was a gripping mystery that had me finishing the book within two days. The movie adaptation with Tom Hanks kept to the story line and succeeded in its book to film adaption.
Peter Jackson’s movie adaptation of The Hobbit is very much different to the book. As only a 300 pages novel it is split into 3 movies( the third yet to be out) roughly around 3 hours each, there is bound to be differences to the movie adaption, but having read the book and seen the latest movies I found that for once the differences did not matter as they can be both enjoyed as the book version and movie version separately.
Another is the adaptations of Pride and Prejudice. If you have read the book and want a good adaption then get the Colin Firth adaption, though six hours long, it is worth it as it basically follows the book page by page. The 2005 movie adaptation with Keria Knightley is a reasonable adaptation to watch when you don’t have six hours free.
But even with some good movie adaptations there are some that just do not do the book justice which is when we have to understand that it is an adaptation and it can’t be exactly like the book. What are youe thoughta about movie adaptations?