Someone once told me that in order to be able to enjoy both the movie and the book it was based on, you just have to treat them as two completely unrelated pieces of art. This sounds like a great piece of advice, but it also seems like most of us still haven't reached that level of zen where the whole "books vs movies" thing can be ignored.
The conventional belief is that movies based on books are never as good as the books themselves. "The book did it better!" has become an iconic, albeit slightly ironic, phrase for comparing things. Even the biggest franchises — you know, the ones with all the wizards or powerful rings — did not escape criticism for not getting it quite right.
It may look like books made into movies don't stand a chance, but in fact, that's not entirely true. Some books to movie adaptations are at the very least as captivating as the source material they were based on. Of course, a lot of things have to come together for this to happen, but the point is history
