ITT: Times the film was better.
ITT: Times the film was better.
This phonograph "reads" a rock’s rough surface and transforms it into beautiful ambient music pic.twitter.com/PYDzYsWWf8
— Surreal Videos (@SurrealVideos) March 3, 2023
ITT: Times the film was better.
This phonograph "reads" a rock’s rough surface and transforms it into beautiful ambient music pic.twitter.com/PYDzYsWWf8
— Surreal Videos (@SurrealVideos) March 3, 2023
Dunc
Have you even read the books? Movie sucked ass
The book was so much better. This is from someone who greatly enjoyed the movie and only read the book later. The politics and dialog are much more intricate in the book.
Wrong. The movie, both times, is absolute shit in comparison. The new one is even worse because people leave with a sense that they know what Dune is about.
They don't.
Twilight
>"My imagination is better than the reality you made!"
Oh fucking really?
Yes fucking really gay. Read e-boita and then compare it with the films.
The second one was decent except for the beginning. But yeah, it was definitely inferior to the book, similar to most adaptations. This is the case with most literature except for when the book was never that good or well defined to begin with and was only ever reactionary or overrated. For example, American Psycho and Fight club were only good when the directors added to the story.
this is a sad post
Not even agreeing with the book fags here but your post is beyond retarded and you should re- examine your life.
>npc can't think
Many such cases.
that's part of it. but also shit like narration/inner monologue comes off a lot better in a book than a movie where it is often cheesy even when using the exact some language as the book. hell, for dialogue in general, books are way more forgiving. cringey dialogue when read is a lot easier to overlook than hearing it said aloud (whether they realize it or not, this is a big reason why westerners prefer subtitled anime to dubbed anime).
plus just stuff like descriptions of the setting or situations have a lot more room to be fleshed out and draw attention to certain details that might be relevant later in text. in a movie, this can be hard to translate without narration (which as said above, often comes off cheesy in a movie).
they are just very different forms of media. a movie is supposed to be consume in one sitting so that puts constraints on how long it can be. it also runs at a set rate so it can't be too complex or people get lost. a book can be however long it needs to be since it will usually not be finished in one sitting and if someone needs to go re-read a paragraph to understand something it's not a big deal.
good movies should focus on the visual aspect of film as a medium, just trying to recreate a book that doesn't benefit from the visual medium means it's basically guaranteed to be shit or at least very different from the book (which can sometimes end up being a good thing, but often not if the book was already good and a shitty screenwriter is just trying to churn something out when adapting it)
Yes, especially when they cut out most of the story and warp characters/events to make it
>He can't picture things
Disturbingly, there's plenty of these cases.
way to miss the point gays. keep imagining
Once Upon A Time In Hollywood might be the only instance, and it's not even like Tarantino is a bad writer or anything, it's just that it's clearly intended to be a movie first and foremost.
Was that a book first?
Yep, I had no idea either until very recently.
Illiterate retards (especially the last post), literally nothing about my post
makes it sound like I was saying the book came first. In fact it's the opposite.
Pretty sure the book came after the movie
Legitimately retarded.
The bad guys
Slumdog Millionaire, the book is dogshit.
unironically Dr. Sleep
Film can only be better if you have aphantasia.
I fell asleep when I closed my eyes. What was I supposed to be doing?
checked and kekt
or if the film fixed many problems of the book.
I imagined a red star, not a children's baby's toy star approximation like this but an actually star, it was dark red and turning supernova.
Euphoric
Autism doctor here calling to let you know that you test came back positive.
based and three-7-year-olds-in-an-overcoat-pilled
did it turn towards you, a single baleful eye in the void, and speak your name in a tongue unknown by all the scholars of mankind, or was it just me?
I saw pic related. What is that closest to?
this test does nothing to me because I always see a Mario star
If I just try to imagine a red star, I'm box 1, if I'm more specific about it "red star on a green background with yellow dots", 6. Don't know what that says about me.
i can imagine the red star. turn it into a 3D object, spin it clockwise than counter-clockwise, rotate it while spinning, make it stop on a dime, and then roll away. yet i can't fucking draw or 3D model ANYTHING to save my life. its like my imagination is locked inside my head
I can imagine a red star but books ask to you imagine so much more than that. Tolkien goes for chapters at a time only describing landscapes.
And you struggle with this?
Yes. I have a poor imagination. I have a hard time picturing what I haven’t seen before, or at least something similar to what I’ve seen before. And when I do it often fades away quickly, as if I was shining a light on a mural and could only picture parts of it at once.
The Chosen…
I'm reading RotK now and I'm usually okay with Tolkien's landscapes but I wish he described the way his characters looked a little more. I can't help but imagine the movie actors for most of them.
>implying that’s a bad thing
What I don't understand is do aphantia sufferers ever dream vividly? If so how is that possible? I feel like dreaming of images and imagining images uses the same parts of the brain.
beat me to it
i can't conjure images in my mind and i feel like i used to be able to
Maybe relax and introspect more, spending time in your own head can be boring or sometimes anxiety inducing but that's how you develop your imagination and your mind.
If you look at that image and do as it asks then you're not imagining anything, you're recalling what you've just seen.
Literally 1 which is probably why I'm dependent on porn to masturbate.
i imagined Decarabia
Netflix seethes when you imagine characters as White
5, I can draw alright and am decently creative, but it's always like there's a fog I'm seeing through trying to use my minds eye. I can conceptualize perfectly, recall what a thing was like, manipulate forms in my mind, but visualizing it is never sharp and clear.
I dont think it is for anyone, otherwise people wouldn’t want to lucid dream.
This is so fucking dumb. When i think of someone's face, i can imagine what they look like, but they don't appear on the inside of my eyelids like a tv screen.
I saw Russian Superman
7
>can picture vivid animated scenes in my mind
>can't visualize books anymore
autism?
rotated the red star, landed on it, and took a glowing red handful of flat star dust
I have psychosis
weird, i can think about trees, people and other shit when reading books, but a fucking red star, no, the thnink that comes to my mind is a big red dot on a black sky.
I can get shit like 6 easy here but I can never picture people's faces
So if you close your eyes and imagine what a distinct person like trump looks like, nothing comes into your head? I don’t get how that works, you know what he looks like but you can’t recall it in your thoughts?
This test is actually clever. You're not an NPC if you see "1" because you don't Literally see a glowing image on yor vision, most people see the final one. The thing is, an NPC will automatically thing seeing black in their vision (option 1) means they have aphantasia, because NPCs lack understanding of deeper meaning.
Tldr: NPCs can see the bright red one in their mind, they just answer wrongly because they get confused easily.
I can see the fully 3d red star spinning with my eyes open when I imagine it, what does that mean?
This is so retarded. If you can really see like 6, blindfold a man and ask them to "imagine" the room they are in. They cannot navigate it. They will stumble around.
The issue is that you don't literally see things with your mind's eye. Can you close your eyes and retain the clarity of literal vision you have with your eyes open? You should be able to imagine and remember visually with your eyes open, they are visual but not literally seen invading your sight.
People with that condition can only recall words or sensations. That is if you tell them red star they can only contemplate the words "red star", if they are told to imagine a coffee they can only imagine the taste of it and so on.
>If you can really see like 6, blindfold a man and ask them to "imagine" the room they are in. They cannot navigate it. They will stumble around.
not sure what point you're trying to make. the reason you can't navigate a room with your eyes closed has nothing to do with your inability to visualize it, it's just hard to update your position in memory to have an accurate map of where you are in that room as you move around. entirely different skill
I see a flag with a red star waving, then tell myself to just see the star, I do, but then a fat russian kid jumps into the air all anime style, grabs the star out of the void and throws it to me like a shuriken.
Jaws
This. The book was very disappointing, tied up in foolish subplots about imagined classist disputes, affairs, organized crime, and other dumb shit. Movie was amazing with all the fat cut out
Sideways is so much better than the book it was shocking.
Godfather, Fight Club, Shawshank Redemption and every Kubrick adaptation are some more that instantly come to mind.
>fight club
Barring the ending I'd probably agree, movie got a little too Hollywood
very awful movie with very unlikable people.
>every Kubrick adaptation
The Shining was trash and turned Jack Torrance from a realistic person to a cartoon character
All of king's characters are self inserts, in order for the shining to really shine it needed a touch of gnomish ridiculousness
blade runner
most stephen king movies
This. "Do androids dream of electric sheeps" sucks ass
I'd add The Graduate to the list
Starship troopers
Wrong.
American Psycho. I've heard The Princess Bride was better as a movie. I haven't read the book yet.
wasted dub dubs. The movie WAS kino, but so was the book.
Why does she have a seatbelt on her face?
NTA, but I really didn't like the book. The first part dragged on for too long. I've heard God Emperor of Dune is really good, so maybe I'll give it a try. We'll see.
Easton Ellis filtered you hard bro
Ready player one
The book reads like a gigantic r/gaming and r/movie wank. MC spends a couple of pages describing his delorean and all the movie stickers he put on it
Also the unironic incel rants when he talks about women
The book looks like utter cringe. Just a list of references.
He got the future right though. Everyone’s like this now. It’s hell.
>The Holy Trilogies
>The Evil Dead trilogy isn't there
Into the trash it goes
Is the entire book written in one line sentences that start with “I”?
No. That's a section early on where he's describing everything he's studied for the hunt. It's supposed to show how dedicated the mc is and why despite being a zoomer he's gonna be referencing 80s shit, but it's also for the author to flex all the media he knows.
>Reads Bester, Bradbury, Heinlein, Tolkein, Gibson
>doesn't internalize any of their work, continues to be a mindless consumer
Wade may be familiar with those authors, but Ernest Cline certainly isn't
Christ I'll never read that book
it's like if Chris Chan was the main character of a sci-fi action movie
Mankind must cease to fucking exist
I love the book more than the movie because of how hilariously bad it is.
I'm on chapter ten and a list of notable moments are
>Wade has a rant about God, the Easter Bunny, and Santa Claus not being real
>Wade compares Haliday's Easter Egg Hunt to the assassination of JFK
>Wade is listing off TV shows and movies he's watched and randomly states that he has a fetish for geeky girls playing ukulele covers of 80s music
>The fight for the first key is nothing but a session of the arcade game, Joust
And so much more. It tries to be like a Steven Spielberg movie and ends up coming off more like a Godfrey Ho movie instead and I love it to bits.
Its a YA novel, I wouldn't expect anything less
The Shining
Agreed. The book was good but Kubrick made it even better which is why King hates it so much.
Someone actually edited that pic to remove swear words.
Fight Club was a mediocre book, the movie way way better.
Choke was a superior book that was made into a mediocre movie.
Why I wouldnt call the LOTR movies better than the books, they definitely fix the issues I had with them.
Most prominently Tolkien's complete inability to write or utilize drama correctly.
Everything is just descriptive linearity without any proper utilization of hte material.
Also ironically, the Hobbit movies, despite being generally shit, examplify this even better.
For example Lake town.
In the book, the dwarfs arrive, stock up, get invited to the major's dinner, and then move on.
That's it. All of that in Tolkien's typical descriptive linearity without anything happening.
Except at the very end, when there's one single line about the mayor being surprised when the dwarfs actually moved on, because he though them to be frauds.
Now THAT is the interest part about the entire stay. Every single drama teacher, highschool or uni would tell you to do something with that. Because thats the interesting dramatic element to their stay in lake town.
Same with the barrel riding sequence. In the books, literally nothing happens despite the situation being absolutely PREDESTINED for something interesting. the movie did go overboard here tho, no contest.
And I feel this is even more prevalent in LOTR because it is inherently a lot more dramatic than the Hobbit.
Which is why I put the movies on a high pedestal. They literally fix Tolkien's faults.
>I need the author to milk everything for drama instead of letting it be implied by the universal human experience
Really?
What the fuck is actually lost in Harry Potter? The movies work way better because there is less chance for Rowling to include dumb moments that fuck everything up.
90% of ron's personality and character development. pretty much everything with the dursley's beyond "they are mean to harry".
the movies cut out a lot of dumb nonsense but they also forget to include some actual plot-important details. That series suffered hard from releasing films before the books finished, the books did callbacks and references to shit that was cut from the movies because they figured it wasn't important
I was an edgy kid. Avid King reader in middle school. Parents probably should've taken that as a sign to get me help early but that's water under the bridge.
Let me tell you something about this nonsensical peer into King's fucked up head. It is boring to no end. There are retarded paranormal happenings like "spooky bushes" that come to life and blue avatar people. And I'd say 35% of it is dedicated to Jack having fond memories of beating the shit out of his kid and wife back in Colorado. And another third is dedicated to the black guy traveling back to the hotel.
The fact that King thinks that Kubrick butchered the book is laughable. The fact that Kubrick took just the premise and made it better is impressive. SHIT book. Good movie. In terms of horror, one of the best.
The living hedge animals were pure cringe. So of course King out those into his version of the movie.
And it's even worse that most would assume since This Shining is the best King movie, it'd be the same for the books. While Pet Semetary is forever in the opposite purgatory when it is by far King's best book.
This could be applied to any King adaption. The screenwriters take the core story of a King novel and make it work. King has diarrhea of the fingertips.
>man who freely admits he doesn't remember his children's formative years because he was too blasted on coke the whole time
it boggles my mind he thinks he can be all fucking high and mighty on twitter about morality shit
>Parents probably should've taken that as a sign to get me help early but that's water under the bridge.
The fuck. Care to explain?
How did king even become so popular? nowadays, he's only known for the movie adaptations he has nothing to do with
His books read like schizo pedo babble nobody likes. Good ideas? sure but the stories always are pure garbage
Frequent and timely delivery of consistent quality for his fanbase and horror fiction fans.
In order from most improved to least improved (but still better than the book):
>My Immortal
>Who Framed Roger Rabbit
>Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep
>The Ring (Ringu)
>Thirst
>The Shining
>Fight Club
>When Marnie was There
>The Lord of the Rings
>The Assassination of Jesse James...
The Assassination is only the least improved because it was incredibly faithful to the book, but it cut out the most boring part, the chapters where Bob went on trial for murder. I wonder if they filmed those scenes or not.
I forgot:
>The Exorcist
films can be better if the book wasn't very good to begin with, or with the film decides to focus on a certain aspect of the story that's more interesting than whatever the author focused on. I'm pretty sure any adaptation of an Ayn Rand work will be better simply because it's less repetitive.
LOTR
those books are just painful to read
Shawshank redemption
Movie was great, bought the book that was supposed to be American literature classic. Found out movie is Word by Word adaptation, except moment where its better
I disagree. The movie leaves out stuff like Anton's internal monologue which is really interesting to learn about.
Jurassic Park
I fell for this bullshit when they told me Goblet of Fire book was much better than the dog shit movie. So I went and read the books and the shit was exactly the same except some for the Sphinx and some other small bs happening in the labyrinth. Same goes with the others of the series. It’s really the source material that stinks, don’t let any potterfag fool you with those lies.
Never
Tumblr is still around? I thought they got nuked to oblivion
Only the porn and even then, they backtracked on allowing tasteful nudity.
Congo
it's been too long since i read the book but it was a damn good flick
All of them
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
Fight Club
Raging Bull
The Godfather
A lot of Kubrick's Films
tbh whenever I see someone acting like the book is always better I assume they only read and watch Harry Potter
Rambo.
The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen
>fricking
Go jump in a lake
Someone tell me how this was cut out without ruining the pages? Annular cutter?
It's a block of wood with the cover printed over it
but even then the column cut out is pretty much the same width as the hole, i don't know of any annular cutters that thin
Why do you think it was actually cut out? There's zero marking on the print itself. All 3 pieces probably didn't even come out of the same tree, let alone original template.
A Clockwork Orange
The LOTR trilogy
The Silence Of The Lambs
Matilda (both films)
The Shining
Blade Runner
Jaws
Who Frames Roger Rabbit
The Fly
>Cut dvd shape out of a book to visually imply that a lot of details is left behind
>"Uhhhhmmmmm..... But u can't read it any more?????"
The original post was cringe but smart-asses are insufferable
Not really. Also books are gay. You really think shit like HP, Twilight and LOTRs would be cultural icons still if it didn't have a movie? No one gives a shit about books, specially now, and if you don't get a movie or some high production TV show then your book is more than likely ass.
>He says when masterpieces like pic related exist
I would like to say that the movie was better, but for some reason there is no adaptation of the greatest horror premise ever concieved
Yeah there is.
Saragossa manuscript. I love both film and book, but the movie fixes alot of tedious story telling. But i miss a lot of the little vignettes the book had, that the movie skipped out on
The Shining
Bait
how did they cut the book like that?
simply amazing
Try finding a good book these days. Go ahead. Just try to do it. Your first instinct might be to google a list of good books, but you'd be wrong. Every list you'd turn up has the same "classics" on it peppered with globohomo-promoted moron gay authors writing about their gooch or something equally gay. It is impossible to find an even decent book that you haven't already read on your own or had assigned to you in school (and most of those school books are equally gay). You will, in your entire lifetime, read maybe 4 or 5 good books. Prove me wrong.
The fact that Kill Team One exists already proves you wrong.
The Kill Team One books are basically the novel equivalent to the Crank movies and I love them so much.
looks like black rifle coffee-core
Its literal gun porn.
A quarter of the way into the first book, the main character gets a goth stripper girlfriend, and he fucks her on-top of a pile of guns.
And this is before the plot kicks into high gear.
does he say a prayer for israel
Ok, I see I haven't sold you on this awesome book series yet. A few moments in it are as follows
>The main character, Sid Hansen, fights a ninja who can cut bullets in half
>The main bad guy, Victor Hansen, kills a group of special forces soldiers with a shuriken made out of old newspapers
>There's a scene where Sid kills a man with a plastic straw
>Sid kills his brother by crushing him in a trash compactor
and so much more that I'm not gonna spoil because this book is just soooooooooooooooooooo cool, and the sequels manage to be even better, especially the 3rd and 5th books.
No, but in the 5th book, we get to see him shoot a rabbi for being annoying.
1, Don't read books made in the last 5 years
2. Don't take recommendations from lists made in the last 5 years
I disagree with the first one, I think there's plenty of books made in the last 5 years that are really good, but I agree with the second one. Thinking for yourself is the way to go. It results in finding awesome masterpieces like Cripple Wolf, The Boy With the Chainsaw Heart, and I Knocked Up Satan's Daughter.
Also don't go on Cinemaphile if you want good book recommendations. They just talk about politics and can't discuss any books that haven't been assigned as a High School book report. Just read what looks interesting to you and go from there.
I just read manga.
nah that's bullshit, plenty of good shit to read. just go look at one of Cinemaphile's top 100 lists and start there. you're right that you can't just trust oprah's bookclub or the new york time's best seller lists to not be pozzed trash but that doesn't mean there are no good books.
Devil's Advocate was far better than the original book.
>enjoying fictional media at all (that means made up to all you retards)
>"p-p-please tell me a bed time story, daddy!"
Grow the fuck up.
there's no greater sign of a pseud than rejecting fiction
QUIET!
Looks like they cut down a lot of the story for the film!
idk if kid's films are worth bringing up, but I thought the diary of a wimpy kid films were far better than the books as a kid
they are different arts, people only compare both because they lack the sensibilities to think of what makes a good film so they just compare the story and of course the original book always have a more developed story than a movie
As much as I can admire the raw creativity you can get away with in literature, most writers are books are just batshit fucking insane and more often than not anything good enough to get a film adaptation is just getting all the good ideas cut out from the bad.
Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy movie isnt better than the book, but the movie made it a lot easier to enjoy the story. Douglas Adams is a fantastic author, but the way he writes is hard to read.
Two Stephen King adaptations since he can not wrap up his stories.Carrie( de Palma version) and The Shining.
One were both were good is Rebecca by Daphne de Maurier and the Hitchcock adaptation.The latter loses tension in the second act but is still a 7-8 /10 movie same as the book.
The Ritual
Coraline
Fight Club
frick!
Recently got the audiobook, and its fucking horrid
read timeline instead. It is a better book of his