While movie adaptations of fantasy books usually set out to capture the essence of the source material, they invariably make several changes along the way.
While most fantasy book fans argue that the original novels are better than the movies, some rare adaptations like The Lord of the Rings manage to stand tall alongside their source material.
Here's our verdict on ten of the most popular fantasy reads around and if the books were truly better:
Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings is a masterpiece of fantasy literature, renowned for its intricate mythology, detailed languages, and profound lore. The books immerse readers in Middle-earth's history, from the creation myths in The Silmarillion to the subtle cultural differences between elves, dwarves, and men.
The films missed many key elements, including the mysterious and enigmatic Tom Bombadil and some of the deeper character arcs, such as Faramir's nobility and Denethor's tragic downfall, which were simplified in the films.
The books are, frankly, a legendary work of art. Tolkien will forever be regarded as a pioneer of epic fantasy. But, truth be told, the tedious writing style in the original trilogy will forever put the books out of the reach of many generalist readers
Winner: Movies
Rowling's novels are packed with details that the films had to omit, such as characters like Peeves the Poltergeist and Winky the house-elf.
Some themes are also nuanced, including the politics of the wizarding world and Dumbledore's morally ambiguous past.
The movies give us the outline but miss the texture - the way ink smells on a Hogwarts letter, the weight of secrets in Dumbledore's eyes, the thousand little details that make the wizarding world feel lived-in.
The films succeed with their iconic casting. But if you're looking for true magic, always return to the pages.
Winner: Books
Tolkien's The Hobbit is a concise, fairy-tale-like adventure. The films, however, stretched it into a bloated trilogy by adding extra subplots like the love triangle between Tauriel, Legolas, and Kíli.
The original tale is all cozy charm: a plump hobbit, some rowdy dwarves, and a dragon at the end of the road. Jackson's version? An overstuffed suitcase bursting with unnecessary additions - love triangles, CGI orc armies, and enough barrel-riding to sink a ship.
Yet, even here, glimmers of gold shine through. Martin Freeman's Bilbo is perfection itself, and "Riddles in the Dark" might be the truest book-to-screen moment in all fantasy cinema.
Some stories flourish in their simplicity. Stretching them thin only weakens the fabric. The book's simplicity and charm are mostly lost in the film.
Winner: Books
Paolini's Inheritance Cycle is a well-loved fantasy series with deep lore and strong character arcs. However, the film absolutely butchered the plot, cutting key characters like Angela the herbalist. The story also seemed rather rushed, with too much crammed into one movie.
While the novel took time to develop Eragon and Saphira's bond, the movie reduced it to a montage. Even fans of the books agree this was a disaster—one of the worst adaptations ever.
Winner: Books
The show's early seasons thrived on Martin's dense plotting, but its original ending revealed the books' superiority in this regard. Dany's descent, Bran's kingship, and the Night King's anticlimax felt unearned without novel groundwork (e.g., Aegon VI's invasion, Lady Stoneheart's vengeance).
The books dive deeper into prophecies, secondary houses, and Tyrion's darker arc—elements sacrificed for TV brevity. Dialogue sparkled when lifted from the page ("Chaos is a ladder") but faltered when invented.
However, while A Song of Ice and Fire is undoubtedly one of the greatest fantasy epics out there, it remains unfinished at the time of writing this article.
While the season finale of A Game of Thrones had mixed reviews, it's a marker of its lasting impact that it will forever be the benchmark for future fantasy fiction adaptations to TV series.
Winner: Movies, narrowly.
Lewis's classic children's fantasy contains rich Christian allegory and a sense of childlike wonder that the film struggles to fully capture. There were deep spiritual themes that were somewhat softened for a mainstream audience, while a lot of time was spent in character development, particularly for the Pevensie siblings.
The 2005 adaptation succeeded in bringing Narnia to life with impressive visuals and creature designs. Tilda Swinton's iconic performance as the White Witch was also quite impressive.
Although the battle sequences were expanded in the movies, strengthening the adaptation overall, the book's deeper themes and atmosphere give it the edge.
Winner: Books
Rick Riordan's Percy Jackson & the Olympians series is a beloved middle-grade fantasy saga that blends Greek mythology with modern-day adventure. While the books have a massive fanbase, the two film adaptations—Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief (2010) and Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters (2013)—were widely criticized for straying too far from the source material.
Also, the movies aged up the characters (Percy starts at 16 instead of 12), removed key plot points (like the Oracle's prophecy), and altered major story arcs. Important characters (Grover's personality, Annabeth's intelligence, Luke's backstory) were watered down or changed entirely.
The books are packed with clever Greek mythology references, witty dialogue, and emotional depth—elements that felt rushed or missing in the films. On the other hand, the movies turned profound moments into cheesy action scenes (e.g., the Lotus Casino sequence lost its eerie, time-warping effect).
The verdict? It's a no-brainer.
Winner: Books
Book Geralt is more philosophical and weary, while the show Geralt (Henry Cavill) leans into the gruff action-hero vibe. The books also develop the bond between Ciri and Yennefer organically, while the show depicts a rushed relationship and even conflicting timelines.
The books generally have more depth, as you'd expect. But Cavill's Geralt is iconic.
Let's face it: Netflix's adaptation is what brought The Witcher the fame it has today.
Winner: Movies
With fantasy fiction, the books are almost always better than the movies. In replicating its signature complex characters and imaginative storytelling for TV series or movie adaptations, something of the former is always lost.
However, the best movie directors and producers find the right balance. And, as Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy shows, it's very much possible to have movie adaptations that rival the source material.
So, which fantasy adaptations do you think surpassed their source material? Which ones failed to capture the book's magic? Let us know your thoughts!
