Why do I prefer "The Expanse" novels to the show?

[CmdrShep2154]

I watched "The Expanse" back when it was on Syfy. The first season was a slow burn. The later seasons were more exciting.

I would not put it the same league as "Game of Thrones" or even "The Walking Dead" but it is decent. I watched it again on Amazon Prime and it was better than I remembered. Was it because there were no commercials this time around?

I got into the books and they really are page turners. I find them even more exciting than the show.


Is the book always better than the show/movie?

[Grimbold21]

In what world is the Walking dead better than the Expanse?

[VinceVega]

The Expanse is miles better the TWD... well imho... everyone has differetn taste. And it is way better than the later seasons of GoT.

Expanse was slow at the start. But it gets faster very fast. Sadly it will be the last season despite there being more books. But i get why. Can't say becuase of spoilers^^

But the books are nearly always better. GoT and the Expanse are no exception.
Well.... for GoT we don't know yet. Maybe ne next books are the same bullshit as the last seasons^^

I generally try to read the books first before i watch the adaption. Not because they are better, but i don't want to have the people of the TV Show in mind when i read the books and tv shows tend to combine characters because most books are too long for tv shows.

[Xykotic]

In what world is the Walking dead better than the Expanse?

Yeah.. To each their own but this doesn't compute.

I really liked The Expanse show. Some parts was a bit whatever but for the most part it was fantastic and I was absolutely hooked.
Not read the books yet, but I intend to.

[Julian Rayne]

Books are generally better. I suspect that won't be true for WoT but in general books are always better.

[XDurionX]

You're special.

[Vynx]

In what world is the Walking dead better than the Expanse?

Had the same thought.
TWD was catching in the first season, then it fell of gradually.
The expanse started slow, and blasted afterwards. Last season wasn't up to par imo.

[Zeta333]

Had the same thought.
TWD was catching in the first season, then it fell of gradually.
The expanse started slow, and blasted afterwards. Last season wasn't up to par imo.

thats the problem with adaptations. They have all this material and most times come out strong but when they start to add thier own curve to the story and go thier own way they step away from what made the books fantastic. Even though the writers are steering this it doesnt compare. Already issues with a main character having to leave due to RL allegations and thats pretty fucking story breaking in comparison.

[callipygoustp]

Are there movie/tv versions of books that were better than the books? At the moment I can't think of one.

[Julian Rayne]

Are there movie/tv versions of books that were better than the books? At the moment I can't think of one.

Twilight? The Godfather movie is almost certainly better than the book. The Shawshank Redemption, even though the book was also pretty great. I also liked The Witcher series better than the books, but then I read an English translation of a French translation of the original Polish, so I'm probably not judging the books fairly.

[molliewoof]

Are there movie/tv versions of books that were better than the books? At the moment I can't think of one.

fight club, i really dislike paihnuk (spelling) though, oh and Game of Thrones, anyone who thinks the books are better havent read 500 pages of briene walking through a field or a 1000 pages of Dany sitting in a pyramid. the guy should create a world then give it to someone else

on topic ..

i sometimes think the order of watching / reading that determines which you prefer.

[VinceVega]

Books are generally better. I suspect that won't be true for WoT but in general books are always better.

Why though? Books were amazing... bit long maybe overall... but that is a big order for a tv show^^

[Julian Rayne]

Why though? Books were amazing... bit long maybe overall... but that is a big order for a tv show^^

Well I should have said "in my opinion" because I kinda hated the books. I think the show may be something of an adaptation distillation. Fans of the books will certainly disagree with me and that's valid. It wasn't the length of the books I objected to by the way - I'm a huge fan of Tolkien, Tad Williams and ASoIaF that are very long. As far as I'm concerned, the longer a book is the more I like it. As long as the writing is good, like Tolkien and ASoIaF.

[callipygoustp]

Twilight? The Godfather movie is almost certainly better than the book. The Shawshank Redemption, even though the book was also pretty great. I also liked The Witcher series better than the books, but then I read an English translation of a French translation of the original Polish, so I'm probably not judging the books fairly.

I knew there had to be at least a few:
The Godfather. I did read the book and the movie was certainly better than the book; though I did enjoy the book.
I also read The Shawshank Redemption and I agree with you on that one too: the story was good, very good, the movie was brilliant. Maybe the best, or at the least close to the top, of pulp to film transitions.
The rest I can't speak on.

- - - Updated - - -

fight club, i really dislike paihnuk (spelling) though, oh and Game of Thrones, anyone who thinks the books are better havent read 500 pages of briene walking through a field or a 1000 pages of Dany sitting in a pyramid. the guy should create a world then give it to someone else

on topic ..

i sometimes think the order of watching / reading that determines which you prefer.

Never read Fight Club but I have heard that its worth the time to read. Maybe some day.

Game of Thrones: the last few books in the series certainly fell off but the first book is fucking amazing and the series comes no where close to it. A Game of Thrones(specifically referring to first book), absolutely positively blows the TV series away: not even in the same universe. The insight into the characters in the first book... yeah, it would have taken multiple seasons to appropriately cover all of that in the HBO series.

[Berndorf]

Books are usually better because they give far more character development via things like backstory, thoughts and whatnot and movies are always constrained by time and what they can convey via their medium. ie In a book the author/narrator can give 10 pages on things without a character actually speaking that are much harder to just include in a movie without narration which movies almost never do except maybe at the beginning. Books are just a better medium for story telling overall imo. Though some exceptions might exist such as the original star wars movies which I doubt would be any better had they been books before.

[Egomaniac]

A reasonable person could possibly make the argument that TWD was, in earlier seasons, a better show than The Expanse. I'm not saying I would agree with that assessment...just that it is not completely unreasonable.

But if we are comparing the shows in their entirety? The exapnse beats both TWD and GoT by leagues.

- - - Updated - - -

Is the book always better than the show/movie?

Almost always. There are always exceptions to the rule...but generally speaking, yes, the book is going to be a superior product to the movie.

Movies have so many more constraints to story telling than books do. Budget, Running Time, Interference from Studio execs, etc. Books don't have to worry about these things.

For a quick example, the Extended Lord of the Rings Set is something like 11 hours...and there is still a lot of missing content from the books.

[molliewoof]

Never read Fight Club but I have heard that its worth the time to read. Maybe some day.

Game of Thrones: the last few books in the series certainly fell off but the first book is fucking amazing and the series comes no where close to it. A Game of Thrones(specifically referring to first book), absolutely positively blows the TV series away: not even in the same universe. The insight into the characters in the first book... yeah, it would have taken multiple seasons to appropriately cover all of that in the HBO series.

The first book was brilliant yes, it fell off fairly quickly from there though. I had read the series and did a read together with an ex, from very early on in her story arc she asked if we needed to read the Brienne chapters, I said no and it worked out well.

I think I just don't like phlinuks style, and Norton and Pitt are two of my favourite actors

Update

I just googled the books and feast for crows was definitely where the books became torturous. I don't actually remember storm of swords 1 & 2 but if that is where he split the books by continent they were not the best either, there were a lot of characters I didn't like on one continent iirc