Originally Posted by underrated29
And interesting. You two are the only two I have ever heard to say a movie is better than the book. Not that I take public polls on that or anything like that but still.
I wonder who else thinks that way.?
I'd say there are several movies better than the books:
The Princess Bride
The Shawshank Redemption
Generally these fall into the category of "Hey that book has an overall good story but the actual details are terrible, let's adapt it and make it better". It's roughly equivalent to why Empire Strikes back is far and away the best Star Wars movie -- Lucas wasn't involved in the details but rather just the overall story.
There there's the movies that are "based" on books but both are good for different reasons. A good example of that is Starship Troopers. The movie and the book are nothing alike -- not thematically, not based on plot or even basic characterization. However, both the book at the movie are "good" (IMHO). The movie is good because of its satirical content and the book is good because of its philosophical content (the book follows Rico's military career from his recruit days to high ranking officer days and is a examination of civic responsibility, sufferage and the realities of war and the people who fight).
In the case of Game of Thrones - I am impressed at the creators ability to take something that is a good on screen adaption of a much more "heady" story. By that I mean a lot of the content of the books is based on the inner monologue of the characters (Tyrion in particular) with the action sequences generally left primarily up to the reader's imagination. To see this type of novel adapted to screen in a terrible fashion, see the original Dune movie.