I love spine-tingling scary books and movies, but no gore, serial killer or slasher movies. True to Leafy form, even when I was a kid I preferred scary movies with beautiful rooms in them--two of my favorites were "The Changeling" starring George C. Scott as a widower living alone in a creepy (but gorgeous) mansion, and "Audrey Rose" which featured the kind of NYC apartment I dreamed of when I was growing up in undistinguished suburbia. Think about it--nothing is scarier than thinking you might have to give up PRIME REAL ESTATE because of an unfortunate ghost/curse/reincarnation/demon possession. I loved the book Amityville Horror although it made it so that I was unable to go into Dutch capes, basements or attics for decades. And then to find out it wasn't true?! Heartbreak. I still remember the rooms from a movie I saw in the late 80's early 90's that was a murder mystery that somehow involved a pair of fancy German scissors, (?) also set in really beautiful rooms in a California mission style home--I want to remember the name so I can watch it again for the decor, but I can't! Anyone know what movie I mean?

I agree with Jan-the quality of the adaptation is critical. As is, or course, the original book-they are filming Little Children, but the book was so awful I can't imagine wasting time watching it all over again! Little Women with Winona Ryder was well-done In Her Shoes was charming, though I found the book a little cloying Pride and Prejudice has been done twice recently-the 6 hour BBC version is the best, the newer 2 hour theatrical version is good as well. On the other hand, Gwyneth Paltrow's Emma took too many liberites.

PS-I have confirmed that my recollections were correct. Someone at a newsgroup answered my question.

They are often totally different, which I think is sometimes necessary, to change what is an interior experience to a moving one. Sometimes the essence of the book is retained very well. But sometimes not and sometimes the movie becomes something totally different. One example of a fail, IMHO, was "The Orchid Thief" which was a movie about trying to turn a book into a movie. I hated the distortion by the movie of what that book was about. I hope Susan Orleans got a hefty check for that one! My dislike for the movie, "And Then She Found Me" caused me to get and read the book by Elinor Lipman. Wowza, not even in the ballpark with the plot of the movie vs the book. However, I didn't much care for the book either. My next attempt will be "Republic of Love" which I sort of liked as a movie but it was sorta weird so I'm gonna try the book by Carol Shields. Two books that I love both the movie and the book are "Dr. Zhivago" which benefits some from the 3D fleshing out of the story, and for me, "The Great Gatsby." The one with Robert Redford, not the newer one. Both books are a totally different experience from the movie, but it is cool to have both the exterior setting and real people living out the experiences in front of you, and then also the experience of their interior lives that you get from the book. In that vein, I liked the movie "Cold Mountain" better than the book. The book got a little too much for me and I didn't have much sympathy for the characters but I did in the movie. Oh and I adore both the book "Auntie Mame" and the movie with Rosalind Russell, even though they are quite different. As a side note, when I was a kid, I ended up enjoying Dr. Doolittle and Mary Poppins as books way better than movies, but the movies did get me into the books. And both Willy Wonka movies were kind of let downs, but the Tim Burton one was especially bad IMHO.