The Telegraph has posted a nice little list of what they consider to be the 25 best book to film adaptations and while most of the titles will likely not surprise you, perhaps the order in which they are placed will.
Considering this is the Internet, the most discussed placement is sure to be The Lord of the Rings trilogy in the 25th spot while the Harry Potter filmed franchise comes in three spots earlier at 22.
Unfortunately, I haven't read many of the books from this list, but I have seen all but a few of the films. I will say I am far more partial to Stephen King's "The Shining" than I was to Kubrick's adaptation and I hardly remember the Harry Potter books well enough to even say if I think they are great adaptations as much as I have simply enjoyed both the films and the books. I never read Thomas Harris's "Silence of the Lambs" although I did read "Red Dragon," "Hannibal" and "Hannibal Rising". My reasoning there was the fact The Silence of the Lambs was so good I didn't need any additional information or description.
I would say I actually enjoyed David Lean's Great Expectations more than the book, but Bram Stoker's "Dracula" is a personal favorite of mine, and no matter how much I enjoy Legosi as Dracula the book will always come in #1 for me.
Of course, there is one thing I want to point out, before offering her list, Telegraph's Melissa Katsoulis points out these are the "25 films that made it from the book shelf to the box office with credibility intact," which tells me she made a list of what she deemed to be the best adaptations and then ranked the films in order not based on how good the adaptation was, but based on how good the films were. This is to say she could believe Trainspotting was the best adaptation of a book for the screen, but the film (with all factors considered) comes in at #17 on the list. So before you go getting all upset in the comments, keep that in mind.
With all that said, check out the list and leave your thoughts in the comment section below. If nothing else this is a great list of films you should add to your Netflix queues if you haven't seen them already.
- GREAT EXPECTATIONS (1946)
- WUTHERING HEIGHTS (1939)
- TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD (1962)
- DOCTOR ZHIVAGO (1965)
- THE LEOPARD (1963)
- THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS (1991)
- DANGEROUS LIAISONS (1988)
- THE BIG SLEEP (1946)
- THE 39 STEPS (1935)
- THE PRIME OF MISS JEAN BRODIE (1969)
- MOBY-DICK (1956)
- BRIGHTON ROCK (1947)
- DRACULA (1931)
- THE DAY OF THE JACKAL (1973)
- ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT (1930)
- EMPIRE OF THE SUN (1987)
- TRAINSPOTTING (1996)
- APOCALYPSE NOW (1979)
- NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN (2007)
- THE REMAINS OF THE DAY (1993)
- THE SHINING (1980)
- THE HARRY POTTER SERIES (2001-2011)
- THE HEIRESS (1949)
- SCHINDLER’S LIST (1993)
- THE LORD OF THE RINGS SERIES (2001-2003)
You can check out the complete list as well as Melissa Katsoulis's commentary on each film right here.
Shame on me, I only read four of these books.
"The Remains of the Day", the movie, managed to improve on the book. The book, although wonderful, is as cold as the butler's character. The movie is more emotional (the book scene, anyone? What about that ending?).
As for "The Shining", I suppose you'll always like more what you did first, read the book or saw the movie – since they're so different. To me, it's all about Kubrick.
(I'd definitely place "Atonement" on a list like this)
I'm not sure if i'm missing something here, but if the list is ranked according to how good the film was, then wouldn't it be fair to expect that "The Godfather" would find a place on the list? It might not have been a book that could compete with the best but I'm certain the film adaptation would have a shot.
I'm really glad that 'No Country for Old Men' made the list. The Coen's nailed that adaptation of a fantastic book.
I'm with Fin…. No Godfather? What about Jaws? This list is hard to figure.
Hey Brad, when you say "Steven King's 'The Shining'" are you referring to the book or the TV miniseries adapted by King himself. I really hope you mean the book because movie vs miniseries is no contest. I prefer Kubrick's ending, but the book's is way more interesting than the pacified miniseries'.
@Fin: I'd say the same for Jaws. Not the best piece of literature but the novel makes for a solid companion to a classic flick.
The Godfather!!!!! What a glaring omission. It´s the best adaptation ever. No argument there. Don´t even try.
And Apocalypse Now is so freely based on Conrad´s book that it could as well be based on a napkin.
AND one masterpiece I forgot until now: One Flew Over the Cuckoo´s Nest.
What are we thinking? Who made this funny list anyway?
The Shining doesn't deserves to be on that list.
It may be a classic, it may be one the best horror movies ever, it doesn't matter, because as an adaptation, it loses SO MUCH to source material!
I read the novel before seeing the movie (for the first time), and they're so different!
And by different I mean that the book is INCREDIBLY better!
And much more scarier. ;-)
APOCALYPSE NOW? It's hardly an adaptation of 'Heart of Darkness', it just uses that book as a sort of motif. It could easily be bumped and replaced with DELIVERANCE, what say?
The Exorcist should also be on that list.
It's a great adaptation! Captures perfectly the feel from the novel.
And the recent Pride & Prejudice (the one with Keira Knightley) is also very good, it's almost as if Jane Austen herself directed it. =P
If we're talking about Kubrick, what about Lolita or Barry Lyndon?
And none of Larry O's or Kenny B's Shakespeare films made it, but shouldn't Kurosawa's Ran be on the list. Yes it's "loosely" based on King Lear, but it's not as far as Apocalypse Now is from its source. Even JFK is probably closer to Garrison's book, and a bigger improvement.
I agree Jaws and The Exorcist deserve recognition, but @ titles that really worked for me are Cronenberg's Naked Lunch and Mann's Last of the Mohicans, flawed films but great adaptations.
I have only read 4 of these and 3 were in a a literature vs. film class, where we read the book then watched the movie. I realize the list takes into account how well the film did but if it did not Battle Royale certainly belongs on it. Probably the best adaptation I have seen.
Definitely replace The Shining with The Godfather. Kubrick's Shining bears little resemblence at all to King's original material, and both have admitted that. King's is a horror tale about an evil presence in a hotel. Kubrick's is about an alcoholic going wacko in isolation. They are both brilliant in my mind, but they are not the same story.
I'm with those clamoring for the original "Godfather" but I want to add "In Cold Blood" as well as "The Graduate." And to have omitted "Ordinary People" is an abomination.
The Telegraph is a British rag, yes? That explains the placement of the top two.
I just remembered, what about the James Bond series?
Sure, some of then (most of them!) have nothing in common with the novels they're based upon. But the best ones are!
Goldfinger, From Russia With Love (a suberb read!) and On Her Majesty's Secret Service are nearly identicals to their book counterparts, and are some of the best movies in entire the series.
And so is Casino Royale. All right, everything prior to the first meeting between Vesper and Bond at the train is made up, but the movie captures the spirit of the book perfectly! Even the ending, even though that Venice climax is created, the 'dramatic consequences' of it are the same.
The third Harry Potter film I'd definitely put on a list of Top 25 Adaptations… the rest are good, but not good enough for that.
"The Lord of the Rings" trilogy would end up maybe in my favorite 30 films of all time, but in terms of cinematic achievement, I consider them #1. I would also put them on a list of Top 25 Adaptations.
"To Kill a Mockingbird" deserved its place. It was amazing. So did "Silence of the Lambs," though I haven't read the novel.
I liked "Trainspotting," but it wouldn't make a Top 25 list of mine. And "The Shining" was the ONLY Kubrick film that disappointed me. Instead, I'd include "A Clockwork Orange" and his final masterpiece, "Eyes Wide Shut," arguably better than the novel off which it was based ("Traumnovelle," aka "Dream Story")
"Apocalypse Now" also deserves to be on this. I thought it was far better than its source material, "Heart of Darkness." So many people say that the novel is ALWAYS better, but that's simply not true.
"Schindler's List"–amazing. But the novel isn't high-profile enough for me to ever think about it being an adaptation.
"No Country for Old Men" and "The Remains of the Day" were great and pretty good, respectively, but they wouldn't make my Top 25 Adaptations list. The other films on this list I haven't yet watched.
Films I would include: "Atonement" and "Salo, or the 120 Days of Sodom" (both better than their book). The others I'd have to think about.
If we're talking page for page the best book to film adaptations, why has The Shawshank Redemption failed to make this list? I know everyone hold the film high (and why shouldn't they?), but really after seeing that movie for the first time, I had immediately cracked open the story, and the adaptation was nearly perfect.
@GregM: Definitely the book. You will probably never see me praise a Stephen King TV mini-series.
How is "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" not on that list? Great book, great movie. Most importantly, a really faithful adaptation.
One of the best book to movie adaptations I've ever seen that was left off of this list was "Atonement." I am also happy that the Lord of the Rings Trilogy got a nod. Anyone who has read Tolkien's works in depth can see just how accurate they really are.
"Jaws" wasn't a terrific movie, but it was a vast improvement on the book, which should count for something.
And, yes, "Cuckoo's Nest" definitely belongs on the list.
"The Shining", "Lord of the Rings", "The Green Mile", "Forrest Gump", and "Sin City" are among the books and comics I've read. I can't tell you about most of the others because I don't really watch old movies…I get turned off by the black and white :)
Umm, where's "Thank You for Smoking"? Arguably better than the book.
A Clockwork Orange: Kubrick and Burgess – what a combo.
I believe the Godfather should most definitely been put on this list considering it one of the greatest book to film adaptions created. Why it is not i cannot guess. :S
I stopped reading as soon as I read Harry Potter was above Lord of the Rings. I have read both LotR and the H.P. series and seen all of the movies, and there's no way any HP film comes close to LotR, as an adaptation and much, much less in terms of quality.
@Damian: Hear Hear. I read LoTR when I was in high school and then watched the movies in college. I have not seen better action adaptations. The HP series adaptations were a complete letdown for me after the third movie; when John Williams left, and Chris Columbus was no longer directing or producing (i.e. had no say on creative interpretation). I guarantee any die hard potterfan will hate the next two movies by yates. Ugh x(
@Damian: Think of the list as more of a countdown and less of a ranking. It would still be wrong, but less vulnerable. I think the person who wrote this either doesn't read much or was trying to do a quick column and didn't give it a lot of thought, especially after reading the comments here. But I still stick to my "Ordinary People" guns. Fine book, excellent film that stayed pretty faithful to the novel. And I remember reading "The Godfather" when it came out and couldn't imagine how it could be made into a screenplay. Turned out rather well actually. And with that thought in mind, for the prize for a excellent novel that overcame an almost impossibly difficult adaptation to become an excellent movie, "The Color Purple."
huwaat?! 'The Unbearable Lightness of Being' didn't make in your list? hehe
What kind of movie site am I posting on and reading where someone says JAWS wasn't that great of a movie?!? Even the IMDB boards don't get that insane. This is clearly a list of the author's favorite books that have been represented in cinema, not the best book-to-movie translations. The idea that the Harry Potter films (a fad series [both books and movies] which won't stand the test of time, I assure you) outranks Tolkien is ridiculous! The Potter series has constantly been critiqued as hatchet jobs of the books, lacking the imagination, fun, and character of their print counterparts. Whereas, the LOTR trilogy accomplished what people considered for more than 30 years to be impossible: it brought the fantastic, unimaginable world of Middle Earth to life!
@k-dogg: Perfectly said. None of the Harry Potter films hold a candle to the LotR series. Not by a long shot.
If any Kubrick deserves to be on this list, God knows its Clockwork Orange – talk about retaining credibility and fullest use of the change in medium – Its was sheer genius compounded by sheer genius – the most perfect meeting of minds in author and director. The Shining? Hello??!
I hate to disagree with great expectations as the best film conversion, as it is a great Dickens book and film ,perhaps the reviewer was only given a short list to peruse, because it was another Dickens classic and no matter that it was made many years ago without the benefit of modern technology it is without doubt a dramatic and retched historical drama conveying the poverty and violence of the sqalid life styles heaped upon the ill healthed poor,it is complimented by a great but sparsely worded script which turns it into a moving grim and gritty reallity of thankfully bygone times.The older version of Oliver Twist has not been bettered by any screen adaption ive seen in my 57 years and i dont think it ever will be. Do feel free to disagree.
'Gone with the Wind' and 'Rebecca' are two great film adaptations of good books and should certainly be in the top 10.
I would replace 'Wuthering Heights' ( the book was better!) with 'Rebecca'