Is the book always better than the movie? Are there any exceptions?

By eugena On August 31st, 2011

A WordPress Prompt Post — Audience, what do you think?

No. Nothing is ever always better than something else. Usually for those of you who read a book and enjoy it then it is a disappointment to see the movie or television adaptation. It will never be similar enough (some exceptions).

As a writer, technically, I could write anything any way I want. Novels are generally written as they come to me and I edit them. Structure per se is not a necessity.

Movies, however, are an entirely different story. The majority of American scripts are written in a particular formula or structure. There are certain variations and sometimes trend changes. To a certain degree, I have started planning my novels in the same structure as a screenplay, at least for its backbone.

An example in action: Number of Characters

The Age of Merrik: The Anointing has a very large cast. I will be cutting down on that cast in Rise of the New Masters, but will probably be expanding it in Dark Desires since it focuses on the Swordmasters. When I wrote the screenplay adaptation of The Age of Merrik: The Anointing, however, I reduced the number of characters and turned The Four and Miriam into two characters.

Movies and novels are generally different. They usually can be both appreciated. Fans may not like a book’s adaptation. I think the Stardust movie is much more enjoyable than the book.