Books That Shouldn't Have Been Made Into Movies

[DK4me]

I agree with Linkhorn, it's not that any book "should not" be made into a movie, they are two different forms of media that have their own unique advantages & flaws.
I do think this is an excellent topic for that same reason.
I couldn't wait for the movie version of Stephen King's "It" to come out because of how creeped out I was when I read the book. Of course they couldn't do it justice because of all the psychological aspects involved with the characters. I have been apologizing to people who loved the movie(none of whom read the book) for years.
Not that I felt it shouldn't have been made, it just didn't have same impact.

[Tiff-thebookworm]

I am probably the only woman to say this but 50 Shades of Grey should have been left in the page world and not put on the big screen. The actors were horrible at portraying the characters, there was no chemistry what so ever and the entire plot did not follow the story line from the first book.

Also The Longest Ride. I freaking loved the book but I wish they would have followed more closely to the book in the movie.

[rosebud11]

The Maze Runner series. I am a big fan of the series and really enjoyed all four books. The first movie was promising, and in my opinion, a decent adaptation from the book. However, I was incredibly disappointed with some of the main points from the book left out of the movie but I felt they made it work. I was hopeful for the Scorch Trials but honestly, after seeing the trailer, I knew it was doomed. It was obvious they changed major events from the book and I could not bring myself to watch it, though I heard it got negative reviews.

Has anyone seen The Scorch Trials? If so, what did you think of it?

[Wasif Ahmed]

The golden compass movie just made me mad. It was dull and boring. The divergent movies as well were not any better.

[websitedesign]

Half Girlfriend and five point some one

[hartsocktr]

"The Shining" It was entirely different from the book. Even Stephen King hates the movie. Usually, it doesn't bother me, but the book is truly more terrifying than the film. There is talk about a Mini-Series adaptation that Stephen King will help direct and write the script. I hope that happens!

[Jbondal]

The first twilight movie was not as good as the book. Also the mortal instruments was not the best (movie wise). The books were very interesting.

[bluegreenmarina]

I think it's a sin to ever try to adapt The Count of Monte Cristo into a movie. That book is like 1000 pages long, and every single page is filled with so much detail and plot that there is simply absolutely no way to even convey a portion of that in 2 hours. Maybe if it was a episodic television series they could do it, but not a movie, absolutely no way. So much nuance has to be lost to shorten it so much - but all the detail and plot twists are what make this book so great.

[k_clements21]

This is tough! I have not seen a single movie that I thought was better than the book. If you have read the book first , you have this whole mental picture of the story. And then a movie director comes along and creates their vision of the story, and you just can't get into it. This happened for me with The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. I have experienced seeing the movie first, then reading the books. The movie enticed me to read the book, and then I fell in love with the novel. But it also made me realize what the movie was lacking from the story.

[Adri300]

The one that comes to mind is The Host by Stephanie Meyer. I know as an author she is not that respected and people often question her talent but I do think this book was a good introduction to the world of sci-fi for those that aren't familiar with this genre. However, because it has so much inner dialogue between the two characters occupying the same space (odd sentence of you are not familiar with the book) it doesn't really translate well into film. This fact itself shouldn't have been even discussed into making a film. This multiple personality element can be translated for small segments of time (I think of Gollum in Lord of the Rings) but it just can't work smoothly for the duration of a an entire film.

[QuothTheRaven]

Hasn't come out yet, but I'm going to preemptively state, "The Dark Tower" series by Stephen King.

[viennablackdale1]

They tried the series Percy Jackson and the Olympians, but I think they shouldn't have, that or they could have put more effort into making it actually like the books.

[Insightsintobooks]

I like it when books are made into movies. I do generally like the book more. I think that the Shining could have stayed a book though.

[Bookwrm2095]

As a huge J.R.R Tolkien fan, I really wish The Hobbit had not been turned into a film. Or trilogy, in this case. The first film was wonderful; I enjoyed it, but as we progressed to the second and third, I could not help but cringe the entire time. Especially the third film. I think what got me is how inaccurate it was, and the whole love triangle between two Elves and a dwarf. It didn't even feel like the Hobbit, just some film Hollywood took and twisted. I understand that not everything can be accurate when turning a book into a film, but come on. It seriously could have been better. :/

[cjohns105]

Twilight series, Harry Potter series (I LOVE the book series, but I can't stand to watch the movies ), and also Game of Thrones. The TV series is great, but the books are amazing and I don't think anybody is under any illusions when it comes to the fact that George R.R. Martin is probably never going to publish another legitimate installment because of the success and money to being made from the TV series.