There is an old saying that ‘the novel is always better than the movie.’ But is that always the case?
A lot of people don’t want to read a book once they’ve seen its cinematic adaptation. I’m a bit of an odd duck (in lots of ways 😊) because I like to read the source material for movies that I particularly enjoy. I love to see how the two differ, how they’re the same, and whether the quality of the writing holds up to the excellence of the move.
In August, I’m going to be chatting with my friend Andrew Stamper on The Stamper Cinema podcast. We’ll be reviewing Jackie Brown, which is a perfect film in my opinion. The movie is based on the Elmore Leonard novel Rum Punch, which is also a favorite of mine. Other instances in which I love both the novel and the movie include The Exorcist, The Godfather, and Valdez is coming. But I’ve found a lot of mismatches as well.
One of my favorite westerns is One-Eyed Jacks, starring and directed by Marlon Brando. The source material for this classic western is The Authentic Death of Hendry Jones by Charles Neider, which I found to be so-so. Likewise, I’m a big fan of the WWI adventure movie, The Blue Max, but the novel by the same name is very different and kind of boring. The Hustler with Paul Newman is perhaps my favorite low-budget movie, but I found the novel by Walter Tevis to be a bit bland.
So, at least in my case, the old adage that the ‘the book is always better than the movie’ rings hollow. But I still enjoy finding out.