In another thread, I mentioned how rare it is that the TV show M*A*S*H was better than the movie it was based on. And that it was equally rare that the movie was better than the book(s) it was based on.
Can you think of any other TV shows made from movies that were better than their source? The first couple of seasons of Fame, I think. Anything else?
Posted by Fyfe (Member # 937) on :
My answer to that is a resounding, Buffy.
Yayyyy Buffy.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
From what people seem to say, Stargate. Though I was so turned off by the movie, I didn't ever really try to watch the show.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Stargate(s) is the obvious one for me
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
Stargate Buffy and Mash are good ones that come to mind.
Highlander, while never great, was still better than the 1st movie, and much better than the second.
Star Trek the series was better than the 1st movie, but then the series came first.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Parker Lewis Can't Lose was pretty good, but I don't think that it was better than Ferris Bueller's Day Off.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Buffy the Vampire Slayer
I didn't like either the movie or the television show of Stargate, but I can't say which was worse.
Posted by Evie3217 (Member # 5426) on :
I can't believe I'm going to say this, but Sabrina the Teenage Witch. I recently watched the movie again (don't ask) and I was astonished by how bad it actually was. The TV show was a lot better.
Posted by BlueWizard (Member # 9389) on :
Here is an odd and obscure fact, after the Ferris Bueller movie, they started a Ferris Bueller TV show that went no where, mainly because Fox came out with "Parker Lewis Can't Lose" that out 'Ferris Buellered' Ferris Bueller himself.
Parker Lewis was on the air for years, and TV Ferris Bueller hardly is a blip in the memory of TV audiences.
I was sad to see that Corin Nemec (Parker Lewis) had such a limited career as an adult. Even as an adult, he was still impossibly cute. Most notably he was in the Stargate TV series. Still, he does have over 60 movie and TV credits, as well as credits of being a Producer and writer.
Posted by katdog42 (Member # 4773) on :
Before I even opened the thread, I was going to say M*A*S*H.
I can't think of any movies that are better than the books but I would say that the LOTR movies come pretty darn close to being as good as the books, in my mind.
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
Yeah, Stargate and Buffy are the ones that come to mind for me. Terminator: Sarah Conner Chronicles might eventually reach that point if it keeps up as good as it's been. But it's got quite a ways to reach before it gets there.
Just gonna say Corin Nemec was awesome as Jonas Quinn in Stargate. And as much as I missed Daniel Jackson, I wish Jonas woulda stuck around. Plus the interplay between him and Jackson would have been priceless.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:I can't think of any movies that are better than the books but I would say that the LOTR movies come pretty darn close to being as good as the books, in my mind.
I think you need to re-read the books, then.
I liked Jonas a lot more than Daniel Jackson. I was really annoyed when they booted Jonas to bring back Jackson.
But what's weird is that after Jackson came back, and I was already predisposed to be annoyed with him, I liked Jackson more than I ever had before.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
Friday Night Lights, maybe.
As far as LOTR, I'll have to second Porter in urging you to read the books again. IMO, as well-made as the movies were in terms of special effects, they did not even come close to the complexity and power of the books.
Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
I liked the Stargate movie a lot, and what little I saw of the TV show seemed extraordinarily cheesy to me. Judging from the large number of fans on hatrack, I guess that's just something needed to be accepted before you can enjoy the material, sort of like Star Trek.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Buffy and Stargate...Just like everyone else said...
Posted by Shawshank (Member # 8453) on :
My Big Fat Greek Life... oh... wait. The show and the movie were bad.
The Godfather was a better movie than book (I actually read the book because I love the movie so much) and the Shawshank Redemption (haven't read the short story, but I doubt it's as good as the movie)
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
I should have remembered Buffy. There was a Friday Night Lights movie?
I've tried reading LotR three times in my life (once after I saw Fellowship in the theater). I thought the movies were great, and I'd love to read a good novelization of them, but Tolkein's books aren't that.
I'm suspecting that the Sword of Truth TV show isn't going to live up to the promise of the books.
I'm going to have to check out this Parker Lewis show. It must have aired while I was living in Israel, because I've never heard of it. And Ferris Bueller is one of my favorite movies of all times. It sounds like the TV version was as good as the Delta House TV show that was based on Animal House.
Oh, I just remembered another one! The Showtime series Paper Chase was at least as good, if not better, than the movie.
Posted by solo (Member # 3148) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: I should have remembered Buffy. There was a Friday Night Lights movie?
And book. The book was nonfiction and the movie was based on the book and the T.V. show was inspired by the movie.
I haven't read the book but I love the movie. If you enjoy the show for interactions with any of the female characters you won't see much of that in the movie. It's much more about the football culture of Odessa, TX.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
I liked the movie version of Contact better than the book. But that may have been because I saw it before I read the book. So I'd like to hear other people's opinions on that one.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
I definitely preferred the book (which I read first). I thought the ending of the movie was lame and wishy-washy.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I read the book after I saw the movie. I liked the book, and disliked the movie.
Posted by JLM (Member # 7800) on :
quote:Originally posted by dkw: I liked the movie version of Contact better than the book. But that may have been because I saw it before I read the book. So I'd like to hear other people's opinions on that one.
No. It's because Carl Sagan was a crappy writer.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
I thought the movies were great, and I'd love to read a good novelization of them, but Tolkein's books aren't that.
That is an interesting perspective.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I agree that the ending of the movie is a bit wishy-washy, but I also agree Sagan is a crappy writer. So, I have to weigh in on the side of preferring the movie version of Contact more than the book. Though the book was an interesting read.
There were some really good actors in the movie that helped make it memorable, for me.
Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
I liked the book a bit better, and I saw the movie first. I think that the romance was kind of an unnecessary plot point (and the less new-agey Palmer in the book was more interesting in some ways). Also, I loved the ending of the book.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
I agree with every show that has been mentioned (Stargate, Highlander, MASH, Buffy etc), and reiterate what Porter said about reading LOTR. Sorry but the movies were entertaining, but nowhere NEAR better than the books.
Posted by Selran (Member # 9918) on :
That's not a list—that's just a Google search.
Posted by Selran (Member # 9918) on :
Oops, it's fixed now.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shawshank: My Big Fat Greek Life... oh... wait. The show and the movie were bad.
I'm not defending the show but the movie is GREAT. So Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
I forgot all about Harry and the Hendersons! I used to LOVE that show when I was a kid.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
So far as books being better than films, I've heard tell that the movie version of Forrest Gump is far superior to the original novel. I haven't read the book. But that movie is, of course, awesome.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Xavier: I liked the Stargate movie a lot, and what little I saw of the TV show seemed extraordinarily cheesy to me.
They are very, very different in some pretty basic ways. Most obviously, the movie is Very Serious, and the show has RDA.
Nothing with RDA is ever serious. For long, anyway. Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
RDA?
Posted by scholarette (Member # 11540) on :
RDA=Richard Dean Anderson=MacGuyver!
Posted by Sean Monahan (Member # 9334) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shawshank: The Godfather was a better movie than book (I actually read the book because I love the movie so much)
Same. The book was enjoyable, but the movie was a better movie than the book was a book. But I liked the non-linearity of the book, as well as some of the plots threads that were left out of the movie. But I thought the characters of the movie were much better defined than they were in the book.
Posted by Sachiko (Member # 6139) on :
Is a mini-series considered a TV show?
I'm tempted to say the Sci-Fi Channel version of DUNE.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
The SciFi Channel version of Dune was not based on any movie.
But I'll agree with you that it is better than the 1984 movie.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
I was totally going to start a thread called, "tv shows that are better than the movies they're based on which are worse than the books they're based on", but I couldn't think of anything and made up that other thread title instead.
Opportunity lost!
Posted by plaid (Member # 2393) on :
quote:Originally posted by SteveRogers: So far as books being better than films, I've heard tell that the movie version of Forrest Gump is far superior to the original novel. I haven't read the book. But that movie is, of course, awesome.
I thought the movie was way too schmaltzy. I've read the book and liked it better; the Gump in the book is a bit more complex and makes mistakes, where in the movie he's just this nice, simple, victim guy who waits for the woman to realize how great he is.
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
I'm stretching the definition of "based on" but the animated Clone Wars was much better than the prequel trilogy that exists around it.
EDIT, because I couldn't let this go - the point of Forrest Gump (or at least one of the big points) is that he is most definitely NOT a victim.
Posted by Sachiko (Member # 6139) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: The SciFi Channel version of Dune was not based on any movie.
But I'll agree with you that it is better than the 1984 movie.
Yeah, I know. I've read the series.
And I have seen the 1984 version umpteen times, and the newer version seemed to me to be based on the 1984 Dino de Laurentis version, in the sense that it was the opposite of the 1984 version.
That is, the parts where the 1984 version departed from the book, the newer version covered well, but then it also neglected areas the previous film had done well.
It's such an even give-and-take that it felt more like SciFi Channel kept watching the 1984 version and saying, "Okay, let's NOT do that! Or that either! And let's do the opposite of that thing!" but sort of forgot about the book, except insofar as it inspired the beginning of DUNE films.
Posted by Sachiko (Member # 6139) on :
*wondering aloud* Did the PeeWee movies come before or after PeeWee's Playhouse?
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
According to Wikipedia, the movie was first.
Posted by BlueWizard (Member # 9389) on :
Side Note: For anyone interested you can find video clips of 'Parker Lewis Can't Lose' at YouTube.com
Note that Jerry, the heavy set guy on 'ER', got his start at the school bully in 'Parker Lewis'.
Steve/bluewizard
Posted by Sachiko (Member # 6139) on :
quote:Originally posted by Juxtapose: According to Wikipedia, the movie was first.
Ah, thank you.
I think the TV show was marginally less creepy, with the added bonus of Lawrence Fishburne as Cowboy Curtis.
Also: the Disney-Hercules movie was nice, bit I really, really liked the Disney-Hercules TV show. VERY funny.
Posted by Evie3217 (Member # 5426) on :
quote:I can't think of any movies that are better than the books but I would say that the LOTR movies come pretty darn close to being as good as the books, in my mind.
For some reason when I read this I had a hilarious vision of them making LOTR into a TV show. The hobbits would bicker over who got the extra apple, while Aragon and Boromir just shook their heads and chuckled.
It could happen. TV producers are just that cruel.
Posted by anti_maven (Member # 9789) on :
I'm a bit late to this party, but I've been wracking my brains on this one and have come up with a couple more:
The Day of the Triffids The 1954(?) film version was worse than bad, but the 1980s adaptation by the BBC of Wyndham's classis was excellent.
All Creatures great and Small They made a film versionin the 60s which was OK, but the 1970s TV version was very good. The original books are as much about the characters as the situations in which they find themselves, and obviously the TV series gave more time and scope for character development.
M*A*S*H I'm already on record as saying the series was beeter than the film in my opinion. I just grew up with Alan Alda as Hawkeye and willexcept no substitute
I can't think of any more examples off the top of my head.
[ May 16, 2008, 06:24 AM: Message edited by: anti_maven ]
Posted by Corwin (Member # 5705) on :
quote:Originally posted by dkw: I liked the movie version of Contact better than the book. But that may have been because I saw it before I read the book. So I'd like to hear other people's opinions on that one.
I saw the movie before reading the book and it's one of my favorite movies. I think the book is great too, but I'm not sure how it compares to the movie. I guess I know what I'll do when I have a little free time: "Contact" marathon!
-----
I'm not usually a "movie > book" guy, but the LOTR movies had the advantage of being shorter and much less boring than the books. Don't get me wrong, I liked the story in the books (ok, maybe not the nevereverending ending, which the movie captured oh! so well...), but they could probably have been half as long without losing anything important.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Late too, but I preferred 'Blade Runner' over 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep'.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
I liked Demon With The Glass Hand more than Terminator.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by anti_maven: M*A*S*H I'm already on record as saying the series was beeter than the film in my opinion. I just grew up with Alan Alda as Hawkeye and willexcept no substitute
Alan Alda? Wasn't he that guy on The West Wing?
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
quote:I liked the movie version of Contact better than the book. But that may have been because I saw it before I read the book. So I'd like to hear other people's opinions on that one.
The movie dwelled on Ellie's atheism and the issue of society's intolerance, along with the obvious hypocrisy of insisting on a religious emissary, yet refusing to accept Ellie's story when she had no proof of her experience. I thought that was very well done. Ellie's frustration at the hearings felt very familiar to me.
An aside: I saw the movie with my son, who was 11 at the time. Several times during the movie, Ellie is sitting at the ridge looking down into a huge canyon, and my son starts pulling at my sleeve to ask me a question: "Do you think there are any deer (or something) down in that canyon?" I was preoccupied with the movie, and shushed him the first couple of times, but finally I answered "yeah, probably".
"Good thing, because if there weren't, it'd be an awful waste of space." /aside
I liked the book a lot too, but for very different reasons. The two addressed different things. In particular, I liked the concept of looking for a signal within the noise, and how proof of god could be built into the structure of mathematics. That was something that really couldn't have been dealt with in the movie, but they did give it a wink when the circle of sand twinkled in Ellie's hand on the beach.
I couldn't say which one I liked better. I liked them both, but I didn't think of the movie as "a version of the book." I just thought of them as different altogether.
Posted by Corwin (Member # 5705) on :
quote:Originally posted by Glenn Arnold: "Do you think there are any deer (or something) down in that canyon?" "yeah, probably". "Good thing, because if there weren't, it'd be an awful waste of space."
Oh, man, that's priceless! Posted by plaid (Member # 2393) on :
quote:Originally posted by Juxtapose: EDIT, because I couldn't let this go - the point of Forrest Gump (or at least one of the big points) is that he is most definitely NOT a victim.
In the movie, the woman (Jenny?) keeps turning Gump down and instead getting involved with guys who abuse her (the activist guy) and hanging out with destructive party types (getting HIV in the process). Gump just waits for her to realize what a good guy he is and come back.
In the book, Gump loses Jenny because she gets tired of him (he's just hanging out on campus and getting stoned a lot; maybe cheating on her as well? Can't remember now...)
Maybe "victim" isn't quite the word, but point being, in the book, it's Gump who messes up, not Jenny.
Posted by plaid (Member # 2393) on :
quote:The Day of the Triffids[/qb] The 1954(?) film version was worse than bad, but the 1980s adaptation by the BBC of Wyndham's classis was excellent.
I saw the '80s one! Quite excellent, one of the first good "thinking" science fiction movies I'd seen at the time.
Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shawshank: My Big Fat Greek Life... oh... wait. The show and the movie were bad.
The Godfather was a better movie than book (I actually read the book because I love the movie so much) and the Shawshank Redemption (haven't read the short story, but I doubt it's as good as the movie)
I disagree. I read the Godfather book after seeing the movie and LOVED it so much better than the movie. I thought the book did a great job with suspense, and fleshing out characters. Also, I couldn't tell the actors apart at times.
I love My Big Fat Greek Wedding. But I agree My Big Fat Greek Like was pretty awful.
Posted by mistaben (Member # 8721) on :
When I was a kid (okay, I was in high school), my siblings and I loved to watch the Aladdin cartoon show. The movie was great, but man that show was funny stuff.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Original posted by Corwin: I'm not usually a "movie > book" guy, but the LOTR movies had the advantage of being shorter and much less boring than the books. Don't get me wrong, I liked the story in the books (ok, maybe not the nevereverending ending, which the movie captured oh! so well...), but they could probably have been half as long without losing anything important.
BLASPHEMY Burn him!!
Posted by Corwin (Member # 5705) on :
First you have to find me. I'm not sure it's worth it. Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
quote:Originally posted by mistaben: When I was a kid (okay, I was in high school), my siblings and I loved to watch the Aladdin cartoon show. The movie was great, but man that show was funny stuff.
I rewatched Aladdin as an adult and thought it was a pretty stupid movie. The lyrics, and the melodies of the songs are absolutely brilliant though and I listen to them all the time. It's occurred to me that I prefer musical soundtracks to musicals.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Taunt]](graemlins/taunt.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Don't get me wrong, I liked the story in the books (ok, maybe not the nevereverending ending, which the movie captured oh! so well...), but they could probably have been half as long without losing anything important.
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)