Shirt.Woot

Goes without saying. Yea, reading!

Another truth illustrated by shirt. Film looks very unhappy with second place. It might also have heard about the switch to digital.

The book about this shirt is better than this shirt.

To combat this shirt, perhaps we should try to come up with the rare examples where the movie is better than the book? Or maybe the super, super rare example of where the video game was better than the book and movie?

I'll start: Golden Eye for N64 was better than the movie.

True message, however I don't like the fact that the shirt clearly points out what the shirt is about. Let people figure it out!

I love the shirt, but can't stand the colors. Bleh.

I was going to buy this shirt, then I realized that I really liked the book better.

Stexe wrote:
I'll start: Golden Eye for N64 was better than the movie.

I'd totally beg to differ there...

Cute and clever way to illustrate the general book was better concept.

However I find it's usually a case of comparing apples to oranges. I mean come on, there's plenty that a book can do well that a movie can't and vice versa. It's a true rarity when both the book and movie (and I suppose it's possible, the game too) manage to tell the story and truly shine in their respective medium. I really don't want a movie to be an "exact" replica of it's book. It's better when they don't compete at all and be their own thing. Case in point, Princess Bride. Fantastic book, the good part version anyways, the movie certainly isn't the same thing as the book, but I can't think of anything I would want changed in the movie. It achieved movie perfection just as well as the book achieved book perfection.

Stexe wrote:

I'll start: Golden Eye for N64 was better than the movie.

No it wasn't, it was just more fun. The Story was better as a movie.

How about... Final Fantasy... Better as a game than a movie.

Doom 2 (too)

lavenderpoet wrote:I love the shirt, but can't stand the colors. Bleh.

I agree. I really like the idea and design but don't care for the color combo. I wonder if they would reprint it in another shirt color?

I hear this comment almost every day in my library. Will definitely be buying this.

Reminds me of my favorite quote: "Never judge a book by it's movie."

safyrejet wrote:Case in point, Princess Bride. Fantastic book, the good part version anyways, the movie certainly isn't the same thing as the book, but I can't think of anything I would want changed in the movie. It achieved movie perfection just as well as the book achieved book perfection.

No.

The book was better at being a good book than the movie was at being a good movie.

Zoo of Death? Bald princess and her hats? Helen? Stew? Fezzik's wrestling career? Westley's early rejection of Buttercup?

The movie was good, but the book was better in ways that the movie could have captured but didn't.

I applaud both. But I buy copies of the book to hand out to the uninitiated. Not so the film.

msharkin wrote:No.

The book was better at being a good book than the movie was at being a good movie.

Zoo of Death? Bald princess and her hats? Helen? Stew? Fezzik's wrestling career? Westley's early rejection of Buttercup?

The movie was good, but the book was better in ways that the movie could have captured but didn't.

I applaud both. But I buy copies of the book to hand out to the uninitiated. Not so the film.

If the movie had tried to be everything the book was in every way, it would have been way too long or required being split up into a trilogy or something. I think it found a good balance to be exactly what a movie needed.

I remember an instance where the poster was better than the movie and the video game.

safyrejet wrote:I'd totally beg to differ there...

No movie in the history of the world is better than playing

oddjob on "complex" with proxy mines.

As for books

"A Clockwork Orange" & "fear and loathing in las Vegas" films were much better than their books

It's really the case that the adaption is worse than the source. The book is normally first, but there are exceptions where the movie or video game or theme park ride or board game was first one.

So when the video game comes first, the movie is usually terrible. Super Mario Bros. The Movie? Gah. IS there a good movie based on a video game?

And Battleship the board game is way, way better than Battleship the Movie.

Stexe wrote:To combat this shirt, perhaps we should try to come up with the rare examples where the movie is better than the book? Or maybe the super, super rare example of where the video game was better than the book and movie?

I'll start: Golden Eye for N64 was better than the movie.

Almost anytime the book was adapted after the movie. See: Mona Lisa Smile. It's one of the few books I just couldn't finish because it was so bad. Movie to book adaptations just tend to be really poorly done.

Jurassic Park was a super dull book - action packed movie! Lord of the Rings also, except people are gonna hate on me. Seriously...hundreds of pages to talk about a long walk?

Stexe wrote:To combat this shirt, perhaps we should try to come up with the rare examples where the movie is better than the book? Or maybe the super, super rare example of where the video game was better than the book and movie?

I'll start: Golden Eye for N64 was better than the movie.

The chronicles of riddick (game) was better than the movie.

Also: novelizations OF movies/games - try and find one that's better than the original.

wearemany wrote:No movie in the history of the world is better than playing

oddjob on "complex" with proxy mines.

It might help to know I royally and absolutely suck at playing FPS and do not enjoy them much at all. Unless I feel like being easy kill bait for the other players. Therefore from my perspective the Goldeneye movie is so much more completely awesome in every way than the video game. Beside, Pierce Brosnan. In a suit. So much better in film than in 64 bit pixels.

I have a feeling this thread will be quite filled up with conflicting opinions and differing p.o.vs. I love most of the Mario games, but I could argue that Super Marios Bros the movie was such a bad movie that's what made it a fun movie, if you're in the mood to watch a so-bad-it's-good movie. Again, I say, apples to oranges.

darklilly101 wrote:Jurassic Park was a super dull book - action packed movie! Lord of the Rings also, except people are gonna hate on me. Seriously...hundreds of pages to talk about a long walk?

To each their own, I guess. Jurassic Park is actually one of my examples I use when I say the book is always better than the movie (see also: The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy). Michael Crichton is descriptive, gruesome, and intelligent. The movie was fun, but it was none of those things.

Stexe wrote:To combat this shirt, perhaps we should try to come up with the rare examples where the movie is better than the book? Or maybe the super, super rare example of where the video game was better than the book and movie?

I'll start: Golden Eye for N64 was better than the movie.

Stardust. The book is good, but it feels less than fully realized, as if Gaiman wanted to throw down a great idea but had too many other projects to fully flesch it out. The movie is fantastic.

Stexe wrote:To combat this shirt, perhaps we should try to come up with the rare examples where the movie is better than the book? Or maybe the super, super rare example of where the video game was better than the book and movie?

I'll start: Golden Eye for N64 was better than the movie.

Children of Men. The book was boring and (IMO) took itself way too seriously. The whole time I was reading it, I was just annoyed at the author who was so obviously trying channel Oscar Wilde, and doing a very bad job at it.

The movie, while not the best, was entirely better than the book. Probably because the only thing they had in common was the basic premise.

My contrarian essence that is unable to resist countering the counter culture loathes and loves this shirt.

chimunga wrote:Children of Men. The book was boring and (IMO) took itself way too seriously. The whole time I was reading it, I was just annoyed at the author who was so obviously trying channel Oscar Wilde, and doing a very bad job at it.

The movie, while not the best, was entirely better than the book. Probably because the only thing they had in common was the basic premise.

Never read the book but did watch the movie and was only mildly entertained only because I previously watched an Outer Limits episode(Dark Rain) that relied on the same premise(probably inspired by the book but came out before the movie). The experience was reminiscent of my enjoyment of the film, "Battle Royale" then randomly viewing the film, "Hunger games". Ugh.

To stay on point with the argument at hand, I guess one could make a case for the video games, "Dante's Inferno" and "Dynasty Warriors". I have to admit to never reading the complete literature of the two epic tales those video games pertain too, but was at least inspired to read the cliff notes after playing them.

darklilly101 wrote:Jurassic Park was a super dull book - action packed movie! Lord of the Rings also, except people are gonna hate on me. Seriously...hundreds of pages to talk about a long walk?

I would also argue that Lego: Lord of the Rings was more entertaining than the books (though I do own/enjoy all three-- books, film, and game).

Fight Club and the The Prestige were both better movies than books (although the books were really good).
As far as video games go, anything that Uwe Boll or Paul W. S. Anderson has directed were better as video games. I mean, seriously. Mortal Kombat? Far Cry? Garbage movies, but excellent games.

MJ is right. Blade Runner the movie didn't even have one electric sheep in it.

Great shirt.

"Blade Runner the movie didn't even have one electric sheep in it."


THIS!!!



I teach Hitchhiker's Guide, F451, The Lord of the Flies, and The Scarlet Letter and I have to warn students not to watch the movies because they are so horrible. However, The Great Gatsby (with Robert Redford, though I bet the upcoming DiCaprio version will be good) is great, as are the movies for The Crucible and To Kill a Mockingbird. I thought Dylan Dog was an excellent movie as well.

Stexe wrote:To combat this shirt, perhaps we should try to come up with the rare examples where the movie is better than the book? Or maybe the super, super rare example of where the video game was better than the book and movie?

"The Natural" with Robert Redford is so much better than the book. That might be because I loved the movie before I knew the book existed, but the movie is excellent and the book is not. I think of that as the exception that proves the rule that the book is always better. =)

Stexe wrote:To combat this shirt, perhaps we should try to come up with the rare examples where the movie is better than the book? Or maybe the super, super rare example of where the video game was better than the book and movie?

I'll start: Golden Eye for N64 was better than the movie.

Eragon. The book was absolutely atrocious.

darklilly101 wrote:Jurassic Park was a super dull book - action packed movie! Lord of the Rings also, except people are gonna hate on me. Seriously...hundreds of pages to talk about a long walk?

You have my sword on this one.

Lord of the Rings is fascinating, but very long and slow and Emyn Muil in one huge chunk is just a beast to read. It also has some less than modern racial undertones. The extended films are just great.

I've heard that the film "The Prestige" is better than the book it is based on as well.

Stexe wrote:To combat this shirt, perhaps we should try to come up with the rare examples where the movie is better than the book? Or maybe the super, super rare example of where the video game was better than the book and movie?

I'll start: Golden Eye for N64 was better than the movie.

Golden Eye is debatable, but how about Doom? Great game, ground breaking in a way. But as a movie? Total flop. I can honestly say I never fell asleep playing the game... the movie is another matter.
I have to give props to the LOTR movies. Not as good as the books, but way better than I thought they would be.

Stexe wrote:To combat this shirt, perhaps we should try to come up with the rare examples where the movie is better than the book? Or maybe the super, super rare example of where the video game was better than the book and movie?

I'll start: Golden Eye for N64 was better than the movie.

Oh, movie better than book = The Last of the Mohicans... the modern one with Daniel Day Lewis not the 1936 one. Also, great soundtrack.

I can't decide which I like better, the shirt or the woot write-up!

As for a movie I liked better, it would be Compromising Positions. The movie had a better ending than the book, and it stuck to the main plot. The book had a few subplots which were OK, but I think the writers did the right thing by leaving them out.

Nice shirt MJ!

My votes for movies better than books:

Shawshank Redemption
Fight Club
American Psycho

LOTR's movies were great! The books: WAY BETTER! But, then again, there is just nothing like the feel of a book in hand and even the smell of the pages.

The Three Musketeers and Gullivers Travels are two more books that I found to be better than the movies, but I do also enjoy the movies.