Lacy Literacy

Book Reviews, Discussions, Listicles, More


Welcome to another Discussion Post here on Lacy Literacy! Today we’re going to be talking about Books vs. their TV/Movie Adaptations.

Recently, I was inspired by Mia over at Pen & Parchment who talked about her personal aversion to film adaptations of books. Because I have a lot of opinions that aren’t as popular, I decided that I wanted to share them in the form of a discussion post because Books vs. TV/Movie Adaptation opinions can be dividing and I’d love to hear all of your thoughts on them.

When a book gets opted for a Movie or TV adaptation, book lovers turn into a chaotic mess. There’s a ton of concerns when your favorite book is about to be turned into a new format. Will the casting be true to the books? How are they going to adapt the plot? or, more importantly, what will they be doing to your favorite characters? Worry is warranted. However, the needless hatred of them when they aren’t like the books is not so warranted.

I think we need to go into more movie/TV adaptations without the idea of “it has to be exactly like the books”. Honestly, you’re setting yourself up for disaster. Making a truly loyal book adaptation, is impossible. There’s simply no way you can turn book series into another media seamlessly. Events, people, and places will have to be changed. It’s the nature of the format.

Look, I get it. Many a movie/TV adaptations have done a terrible job adapting their source material because they went too far from the books and divorced the characters and the themes from the story so much that when it got on the screen it was a hot mess (like The Lighting Thief & The Golden Compass). Having to experience your all time favorite books being turned into 2 hours and 40 minutes of directionless nonsense is painful. But, divorcing the characters and the story from the books can reap incredible benefits. In fact, all of my favorite Movie & TV adaptations of books are ones that diverge heavily from the books that they are based off of.


TB4_KeyArtRED_600110526105306.jpgTitle: True Blood
Air Date: September 7, 2008 – August 24, 2014
Books it’s based off of: The Southern Vampire Mysteries by Charlaine Harris
Why it’s better than the Books: For all of its problems, True Blood is one of the best examples of what adapting a book series into a show should be like.

In True Blood, vampires have only recently “come out of the coffin”. While reading the books, the setting isn’t well developed. We’re told that vampires are recently out, but that’s it. Because the books are from Sookie’s firs person POV, the books had limited world building potential. Throughout the show, there were scenes with characters showing what the new culture is like. The opening scene shows a debate on television about vampire rights & we get to see a lot of scenes with the American Vampire League and The Fellowship of the Sun.

True Blood took minor characters from marginalized identities like Lafayette, a black gay man, who was killed off in the second book after having maybe two lines and then turned him into a major character who has his own storyline (albeit the writers could’ve done a lot better by him). Additionally, True Blood gave Sookie deeper female friendships that didn’t end for petty, nonsensical reasons.


The shining thing that made it stand out was how it diverged from the books. True Blood kept a lot of the major plot points like Bill & Sookie being together at one point, Eric loosing his memory, etc, but the motives for each event and the road that led to them was different. While they made changes, the changes made sense in show canon which is what matters. Often, when adapting books writers will divorce the story from the characters so much that the characters don’t make much sense because they were being propped up by the development the books had, not what the show had. But, that’s an issue I’ll get into deeper next.


got_-_official_poster.jpgTitle: Game of Thrones
Air Date: April 17th 2011 – Present
Books it’s based off of: A Song of Ice and Fire by George R.R. Martin
Why it is worse than the Books: I’m upfront about this: I think that Game of Thrones is one of the worst shows on television. It’s sucked out the bite out of the characters & the plot and turned it into a weekly hour of misogyny, racism, homophobia, bad acting, and poor story telling.

However, that wasn’t always the case (although it has always been misogynistic & racist). I liked the show the first two seasons. As the series is a behemoth clocking in at around 900 pages per book, it’s impossible to truly adapt because the setting is so huge & the characters are so numerous. I understood the changes they made up to a point. While the show did cut a lot of world building content, the visuals were spectacular. I’m still in love with the early costumes for Margaery because they fleshed out her character, which is something you visually can’t do in books all that well.

GoT did wonders for non POV characters they did include. In A Song of Ice and Fire, GRRM is very particular about his POV characters which means that you don’t get to see non POV characters have their own actions independently of main characters. However, in GoT we got to see more of characters like Petyr Baelish whose appearances would otherwise be limited to a few Stark POVs. 

Where did GoT go wrong? Well, when it started to truly cut off from the books in Season 4 (and because it was still being written by the human turd pictured below).

Screen Shot 2017-08-09 at 7.27.08 PM

Now, you can make changes to character motives. When it’s done right, it’s interesting. However, when a series has relied heavily on the development from the books and then the writers start throwing in show canon, it becomes a problem. Making changes has to be intentional in every aspect. Piecing together storylines from the books while adding new ideas and characterization without revising the original book storyline leads for a messy, nonsensical plot. It’s why actions & motives of many GoT characters don’t make all that much sense, and it’s why GoT has become this “the fan favorites always win and are imperfect” thing despite not actually showing that in their showverse (the best example of this is through Jon & Dany’s storylines).


But, that’s my two cents.

My Favorite & Least Favorite Book adaptations do have some good in them which is why I don’t write off Book adaptations when they start straying away from book canon. And I don’t think you should either. 

What’s more amazing than to see your favorite characters take a new journey and a new shape? And if it’s terrible that means you get to have fun mocking it. I mean, what was more fun then all those fanvideos we got out of The Lightning Thief movie?



And now for the discussion part. I’m really excited to see what you all think about Books vs. their TV/Movie adaptations, so join the discussion below!

books vs movies discussion.png

12 thoughts on “Discussion Post: Books vs. their TV/Movie Adaptations

  1. Shouni says:

    I am okay with a few changes as long as they are faithful to the main storyline. I understand that it’s our favorite characters who are just out in another journey in the adaptation but I’d much rather they go through the same journey they did in the books (if that makes sense). I do realize you can’t have a completely faithful adaptation with the limited amount of time in a movie but that doesn’t stop me from wanting it anyway 😄 . Like I said though, I am okay with a few changes like in the Harry Potter movies. The Lightening Thief movie does not exist in my mind.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. lacyliteracy says:

      Thanks understandable! It can be hard to see changes when you’re so used to the book storyline, especially if the book is done so well.

      I usually pretend The Lightening Thief doesn’t exist too. 😂


  2. Ahh this is such an interesting discussion! I’m okay with changes, if it means changing problematic aspects from the books, or if it’s just an interesting change/addition, that’s still in character/makes sense for the world. I guess it also really depends on the source material. While Percy Jackson of course isn’t perfect, it didn’t need to be changed? I get that books and movies are different formats, but changing the plot so much was really not necessary. And a lot of characters were just,, not in character. Ugghh I wish we could just erase it from existence 😂 My favourite adaptation is The Perks of Being a Wallflower. I also really love Shadowhunters, but I don’t like the books so I don’t even see it as a book adaptation anymore haha, I just see it as a separate tv show

    Liked by 1 person

    1. The Perks of Being a Wallflower is one of my favourite adaptations too! I love the movie just as much as I do the book, and the casting was wonderful.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Yes same here! They captured the book beautifully.

        Liked by 1 person

    2. lacyliteracy says:

      Thanks! Changing problematic aspects from the books is a must for me & one of the reasons why I thought True Blood was so much better than the books. The source material definitely matters too.

      The Lighting Thief was embarrassing tbh. The changes didn’t make any sense, and the writing was incredibly sloppy.

      I feel the same about Shadowhunters! I used to love TMI. Today, I’m not the biggest fan of it but I find Shadowhunters so addicting & a lot more fun than the books were. Separating the show from the books helps a lot with the enjoyment factor. Also, the fact that there was a movie adaptation of TMI already helps me to see all the adaptations as separate entities because each one is completely different.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. I have to admit that I enjoy adaptations that don’t stray from the main storylines. If anything, I think problematic content should be cut out. What I absolutely don’t like is when the creators create new stories and leave out old storylines instead, which is what happened in Game of Thrones. I don’t know why it was necessary since so little of the book could be adapted. I also absolutely hate adaptations that focus a lot more on sex, violence and gory details than the book does, which surprisingly enough considering how much Game of Thrones focusses on all of this details, happened even more in the adaptation.

    However, I do think it is possible to change the adaptation a bit, so that even book lovers have something new to experience. I do not however think that these changes should alter the actual plot.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. lacyliteracy says:

      A Song of Ice and Fire is pretty tame in comparison to what GOT is like. It has its representation problems, but it’s nowhere near as bad as the show. They purposely added in misogyny & the racism was so evident with how they handled the Martell’s storyline (I’m still bitter they cut out Arianne. But in a way it was good since she didn’t have to get treated terribly by D&D).

      I definitely get not wanting the plot altered. With adaptations like True Blood, I hated so many aspects of the books that I was more than happy to see changes. With GOT I wasn’t as happy because I loved the books so much and the writers obviously have no storytelling capabilities.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. I really liked the True Blood adaptation as well. I read all the 10+ books and they were so insanely repetitive and one sided, I definitely enjoyed the show more.
    As for GoT … I am confused about some of the later changes as well. I still like the show, but when they went too much off book (it was especially noticeable in season 5 for me) they lost me a little.
    Some of my favorite adaptions are Me and Earl and the Dying Girl, The Magicians TV show, the Ruby Red films and despite erasing a narrative I quite liked P.S. I Love You. Then there’s some shows and films I wasn’t so happy about such as Inkheart and the Secret Circle.
    When it comes to TV shows it so much depends on which network is doing the adaptation and how well the casting is done. I’ve learnt to deal with the fact that the story probably won’t be 100% faithful to the book. It might even be boring to see it play out exactly as it was in the book, however, as soon as they change too much, I get frustrated. I am just thinking of the Shadowhunters show and how much of future storylines they have simply made impossible. I only hate watch the show now to know what they did wrong this time.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. lacyliteracy says:

      I’m glad you feel the same about True Blood!! Sookie’s POV bothered me to no end. I loved seeing other characters have their own agency in the show.

      I’ve seen Me and Earl and the Dying Girl, but I’ve never read the book. I thought it was a good film.

      The network definitely matters! Whenever the CW starts a book adaption, I already know that there are going to be huge changes and that I’ll probably give up on it. With Shadowhunters, I didn’t mind the changes. Now, I’m not a big fan of the books anyways which means I’m not invested in the original storyline. However, some of their choices seemed kind of strange like with you said about how they have made a lot of future storylines impossible to do in showverse.


      1. With Me and Earl and the Dying Girl, Craig was just such an unlikable character in the book. I hated him and the movie was just way more beautiful.

        Yeah, the CW can’t do anything faithfully. I think when it comes to shadowhunters, I am less invested in everything to do with the Mortal Instruments, but I was super into the Infernal Devices and if they touch those books after what they’ve done, I will riot.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: