If you can even call it that. Wow. There is so very little in common between the two. Admittedly, it has been a while since I've actually watched the movie, but I'm very certain that the last thing taken from the novel is the motel massacre. Ya know, the one that happens in the first 15 minutes of the movie?
shareWho cares? The movie is a masterpiece. If Carpenter felt he didn't want to stick to the book, I don't see the problem.
So what about the book? Is it worth to read? Good books about vampires are unfrequent.
Reading the history of the production, I'm not sure if JC even knew it was based on a novel at all. Seems he was given 2 scripts, one that took place in a vampirized Vatican with a vampire Pope as the villain and another that took place in a high tech future where vampires are more common than people. Both ideas which are even further from the novel than the actual film. There was one director hired and 3 more considered before he was brought on.
The novel starts off similar to the movie with the cleaning out of a nest. After that they party at the motel like the movie. Only one other member of the team survives and they join the two members that weren't along at the time. Then Jack (who is more of a Dolph Lundgren type) has to try and form a new team.
I do think it's worth a read. I listened to it, so maybe that made it easier. I really don't think it was all that bad, though. I think more than anything, just seeing if it ever came back to what we saw in the movie was a pretty big driving factor for me (which I have ruined for you).