Whether you’re a bookworm or a movie lover, there are times when the movie version just doesn’t cut it. Lack of detail, overlooked plots, or even bad acting are some of the reasons many movie adaptations end up on Rotten Tomatoes.
Harry Potter, J.K. Rowling
The Harry Potter movies take viewers on a magical and captivating journey into the world of magic, and yes, the performances, sets, and cinematography were pure Hollywood. However, if you haven’t read the novels, you’re denying yourself an opportunity to experience the story of young Harry Potter from the author’s perspective. To miss out on the brilliant brain of J.K. Rowling is a sad existence.
Twilight, Stephenie Meyer
When the movie was released, vampire fans were divided; some preferred the books, and others said the movies far exceeded the books. Those who argued the former agreed that the movies were well-adapted and the characters were well-formed, so what went wrong? The dislike of the actors seemed to cause the most problems. Kristen Stewart didn’t cut it as the Bella Swan that we envisioned, which changed everything.
The War of the Worlds, H.G. Wells
H.G. Wells’ classic novel has been adapted numerous times, but few have come close to the 1938 radio broadcast and 2005 Steven Spielberg movie. While the movie ticks all the right boxes and provides all the military action following an alien invasion, it still fails to depict the sense of realism that the original novel offers.
Frankenstein, Mary Shelley
Sadly, none of the televised or movie adaptations compared to Shelley’s original gothic novel. Watching the story of Frankenstein and his creation rarely moves beyond the story of an evil entity intent on murdering people. Shelley gave the story depth and heart, and that’s precisely why no movie adaptation will ever come close.
The Great Gatsby, F. Scott Fitzgerald
You’ll love the movie if you’re looking for a large production with famous actors, aesthetic beauty, and opulence. Stick to the novel if you want a classy story with a pulse. It’s far less superficial.
Lord of the Rings, J R R Tolkien
While Peter Jackson’s film adaptations are visually stunning, Tolkien’s richly detailed prose and fantasy world-building offers a depth of storytelling that simply can’t be captured on screen. For an epic adventure, it’s better to dive into Middle-earth through the pages of the books.
Jurassic Park, Michael Crichton
Steven Spielberg’s movie adaptation is a thrilling ride with fantastic CGI and fast-paced action scenes, but what we’re essentially seeing is the story of a bunch of tourists escaping some dinosaurs. Crichton’s original novel explored the science of recreating dinosaurs and the consequences of playing God in a way that the movie only scratches the surface of. It depends on how deep you want to get.
To Kill a Mockingbird, Harper Lee
Gregory Peck’s iconic portrayal of Atticus Finch may be etched in cinematic history. Still, Lee’s Pulitzer Prize-winning novel explores racial injustice, moral courage, and the loss of innocence in the American South. Unfortunately, the movie bypasses a lot of detail.
The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, Douglas Adams
While the quirky humor and absurdity of Adams’ sci-fi comedy translate well to film, the book’s zany characters, witty dialogue, and satirical commentary on society are best experienced on the page. The movie fails to capture the wordiness and many of the insightful reflections of Douglas Adams.
Charlie & the Chocolate Factory, Roald Dahl
One of the greatest joys of reading the novel is the opportunity to visualize eccentric characters in the mind. The original Gene Wilder movie and Tim Burton’s film adaptations dazzled with their visual flair, but they lacked the depth of imaginative storytelling and quirkiness that came with the novel.
Fight Club, Chuck Palahniuk
A book, you say? Yes. It comes as a surprise to many. David Fincher’s film adaptation has become a cult classic, but the gritty novel offers a more visceral and raw exploration of masculinity and the search for identity in modern society. The only downside is that you don’t see Brad Pitt’s torso.
The Hunger Games Trilogy, Suzanne Collins
The Hunger Games and Catching Fire made for great movie adaptations, but when it came to Mockingjay: Part I and II, the detail was all but lost. The films capture Panem’s thrilling action and dystopian world, but Collins’ original novels offer a deeper exploration of Katniss’ fight for survival and the corrupting influence of power.
The Shining, Stephen King
Not everyone knows that The Shining is based on a Stephen King novel. Stanley Kubrick’s haunting adaptation was undoubtedly a movie masterpiece that did the book justice. Still, King’s original novel delves deeper into the story’s psychological horror and family dynamics.
1984, George Orwell
1984 is a book of such intelligent brilliance that no film adaptation could ever capture the menace of Big Brothers’ watchful eye with such detail. The famous newspeak simply failed to resonate in the movie. If you liked the movie, you need to read the novel.
Pride & Prejudice, Jane Austen
While the various film and TV adaptations of Austen’s beloved novel are fantastic in their own right, nothing quite compares to the original text’s wit, charm, and social commentary. The tepid and acerbic relationship between Elizabeth Bennett and Mr. Darcy must be read in print.
Gone with the Wind, Margaret Mitchell
Vivien Leigh’s iconic portrayal of Scarlett O’Hara may have been unforgettable, but nothing compares to the written words about love, war, and survival in the American South. As a timeless classic, you need to read the novel.
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Stieg Larsson
David Fincher’s stylish adaptation is a tense and gripping thriller, but it lacks the depth surrounding Swedish society’s dark and disturbing underbelly. The movie’s premise feels basic compared to the novel, and action scenes often replace the darker backstory.
The Lovely Bones, Alice Sebold
Peter Jackson’s film adaptation perfectly captures the eerie atmosphere of the afterlife, but it lacks the real-life quality of a family dealing with the loss of a child. Sadly, the movie depicts Susie’s Heaven as a colorful, fantasy-like environment, while the novel takes on a much darker perspective of death.
