Ultimate Geek Fu

“The movie was good but the book was better.”

How many times have you said that after watching a movie based on a novel you had read? It's a standard claim, perhaps made to allow us to feel superior for having discovered the book long before the masses. It doesn't hurt that the claim is usually true; at least as far as we're concerned. But what about the counter claim?

“Wow, the movie was a lot better than the book!”

I'm willing to bet you say that so rarely that you'd be hard pressed to name five movies you enjoyed more than the book. I know, because I can only come up with four off the top of my head.

The Iron Giant – Very loosely based on children's story by Ted Hughes, this is one of my all-time favorite animated movies. While the original story has many of the core elements, setting the movie in Maine as cold war paranoia was escalating was a stroke of genius. The climax of the movie was much more exciting and far more moving than the climax of the book.

The Princess Bride – I know people who liked the book more than they liked the movie. They're welcome to their opinions, wrong though those opinions may be. This is not to say that the book was bad, because it wasn't. Just the movie was way better.

Die Hard – Wait, Die Hard was based on a book? Yep, it's based on the novel Nothing Lasts Forever by Roderick Thorp. I recognized the storyline shortly after “terrorists” took over the building. The movie changed several of the characters names, ages, and relationships. Also, in the novel the terrorists really were terrorists. Changing the terrorist plot into a robbery plot really allowed this one to take off. Hans Gruber was a much more colorful villain than the book's Anton Gruber. The same can be said of the movie's John McClane compared to the book's Joseph Leland. I really enjoyed the book, which makes the claim that the movie was better all the more powerful.

The Scarlet Pimpernel – They seek him here, they seek him there, those Frenchies seek him everywhere! And I'd recommend you seek out the 1982 made for television movie starring Anthony Andrews and Jane Seymour. The original book is an entertaining bit of early 20th century romantic adventure, but this lavish costume adventure captured my imagination far better than the novel.

~brb suggested Sahara, based on Clive Cussler's novel of the same name. I've read the book and seen the movie and think I enjoyed the movie more than the book, but details are sketchy. Still, I'm writing this column so I'm going to claim Sahara as a fifth movie that was better than the book it was based on.

An honorable mention goes to Stardust. I loved the novel by Neil Gaiman but, to my considerable surprise, enjoyed the movie just as much, despite several differences between the two.

So, how about it? Can you name five (or more) movies that were better than the books they were based on? Got arguments with my selections?

Let the arguments begin!