When a good horror book really shocks or scares its audience, the more creative amongst its readers start thinking of how they would adapt such a story.
Sometimes, those screenwriters, cinematographers, filmmakers, and directors are able to deliver a movie that sures its source material, creating a film that makes the book it was based on seem dull in comparison, much to the dismay of the original author. Sometimes, though— Sometimes, those creators don’t understand the work, or they can’t translate it, or it simply can’t be done, and the movies turn out much worse than their source material.
Better: Let the Right One In, 2008
First things first, the book being better than the movie certainly does not mean the movie is bad, and there is no better example than the first entry on this list, Let the Right One In. Originally titled Låt den rätte komma in and written by Swedish author John Ajvide Lindqvist, this 2004 novel looks at the relationship between a little human boy and an extremely old vampire child, exploring what it means to be human and just how dark humanity can truly be.
Though the book is certainly better than the movie, the movie is absolutely still amazing and should definitely be viewed — after you finish reading the book.
Worse: The Shining, 1980
One of the most consistent criticisms of Stephen King’s work is that he just can’t write a good ending, and, in the end, this is what does in the novel The Shining. A behemoth of a book and, arguably, one of King’s best, the novel completely falls apart by the last act. The creepy, thrilling tale King tells for upwards of seven hundred pages collapses by the end and completely ruins its own story.
If the ending fits the rest of the book, The Shining would not be where it is on this list; however, Stanley Kubrick was able to make a cohesive story with a good, solid ending for The Shining movie adaptation, making it a better story overall.
Better: Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark, 2019
When it was announced that Guillermo del Toro was attached to produce a film adaptation of Alvin Schwartz’s series of illustrated horror books for children, Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark, the horror community lost their collective minds with excitement. The books are still favorites for most horror fans and are often cited as the first scary books that people reading, with stories that still haunt its readers to this day.
However, the movie adaptation was a bit lackluster, comparatively. Though still a fun movie with some creepy elements in its own right, it doesn’t even come close to touching the quality and scariness of the original books.
Worse: Jaws, 1975
This is probably seen as a gimme to most people, but it still needs to be said: Jaws, the movie is infinitely better than Jaws, the book. The plots in the book are a mess and the characterization is all over the place, with little to no redeemable features to most of the main plot and characters.
Those elements aren’t necessary for a book, but acting like unlikable characters are likable is an entirely different and irritating ballgame. In the movie adaptation of Jaws, however, the characters are tightened up and well-rounded, the plotlines are fixed to make sense and thread together well, and the ending is like a fine wine — better every day with age.
Better: The Haunting (of Hill House), 1963
This one squeaks by with a very thin margin, but Shirley Jackson’s 1959 novel The Haunting of Hill House is the superior version of the story, even above the iconic 1963 horror film The Haunting. To this day, The Haunting is still considered one of the greatest horror movies ever made, and pretty much everybody in the horror community agrees, which should speak volumes as to just how good Jackson’s original novel truly is.
Much like her other iconic works, such as “The Lottery,” The Haunting of Hill House is just filled with this sense of terror and dread that is impossible to translate. Jackson’s ghost stories are at their best and most horrifying when reading in her original writing.
Worse: The Silence of the Lambs, 1991
As is, tragically for the author, the case with adaptations of pretty much all of Thomas Harris’ work, The Silence of the Lambs as a film is superior to The Silence of the Lambs as a novel. This is not to say the books are bad when they’re actually enjoyable — so much so that The Silence of the Lambs won the Bram Stoker Award for Best Novel in 1988.
No, it’s more of a reflection of the immense fascination that filmmakers have with Hannibal Lecter as a character that influences just how good these adaptations are. Much like Bryan Fuller’s TV series Hannibal, Jonathan Demme’s The Silence of the Lambs takes the plot and the characters and goes the extra mile to take the story from good to great.
Better: The Woman in Black, 2012
The 2012 film The Woman in Black, starring Daniel Radcliffe, is a very enjoyable horror movie with an ending that makes a lot of audiences still jump nearly ten years later, but the 1983 Susan Hill novel The Woman in Black that the movie is based on is just better overall.
Where the book is downright terrifying, with tension building up and scares lurking potentially in the shadows around every corner, the movie ended up kind of lackluster. Though Radcliffe delivers a stellar performance, as always, the story just doesn’t hold up in this screen adaptation. The book delivers the story in a far superior manner.
Worse: It, 2017
Perhaps a very hot take, but It is better as a movie. The two-part 1990 miniseries adaptation of It, as well as It Chapter One in 2017 and It Chapter Two in 2019, were able to cut to the quick of a story that, in novel form, is simply unwieldy. It’s over a thousand pages long, only slightly edited, and full of horrors that likely torment Stephen King but translated nonsensically to the page.
Filmmakers, when taking the story of It, are able to pull the amazing characters and the interesting horror from his tale while leaving behind some of the more disgusting or confusing elements that the book has. However, the book is still a very good read if you’re looking to be unsettled and pretty freaked out.
Better: Frankenstein, 1931
Through no fault of its own, the film adaptation of Frankenstein was before its time. It may be a trailblazer in the horror genre — and some would argue in the film industry as a whole — but it pales in comparison to its source material. Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein is arguably one of the greatest books ever written, telling a sprawling and dynamic horror tale of a man who mistakenly creates life and then flees the consequences of his appalling actions.
The characters in the book and the way Shelley tells her story can never truly be translated to the screen. Though the 1931 film Frankenstein, and all the subsequent adaptations, have been wonderful and enjoyable, nothing can touch the original book.
Worse: American Psycho, 2000
Bret Easton Ellis’ 1991 novel American Psycho is a book so graphic, so violent, and so controversial that it can supposedly only be sold wrapped in shrink-wrap to prevent unsuspecting or immature eyes from seeing the horrors that lay inside. However, gore and gratuitous violence towards women does not a good horror book make.
Though the book leans harder into the more intense and extremely satirical aspects of the story, it can be too hard to read for no actual reason. Mary Harron’s adaptation, the 2000 film American Psycho, not only features what could arguably be the best performance of Christian Bale’s career, but also a far superior take on Ellis’ original story.
