Books vs. Movies

ARGH!!!!! I hate people who say "why read books thats why we have movies". dont get me wrong i love movies but oh my god that just pisses me off for some reason. first of all, you cant make a book into a movie and not cut out anything second of all can you say LAZYYY?

ugh it just makes me mad and i dont know why. I love reading and books so BITE ME!

ok im done now.

Edit Delete
Moderate: Hide this post
21 replies since 15th November 2008 • Last reply 15th November 2008

I always feel that it's such a shame when people show absoloutely no interest in reading anything other than what's required.

I'm a fan of both books and movies, I love to see how books are adapted into movies & what differs between the two.
Books are ultimately more captivating though, as they enable you to really use your imagination and picture what's going on, rather then just sit in front of a screen for 2 hours and not really feel any connection to the story...

Edit Delete
Moderate: Hide this post

reading is fun. It take imaganation. The bok comes alive in your mind. I always think the book was way better then the movie

Edit Delete
Moderate: Hide this post

I think most of the time the book will be better than the film, but sometimes a mediocre idea in a book can be transformed into a masterpiece on film.
Both are valid forms of art and creativity, but I would recommend people to always try to read a book before they see a film of it. That is how I try to do it anyhow ;)

Edit Delete
Moderate: Hide this post

Uh the worst one ever is Eragon. Awsome book written by a kid, terrible terrible movie

Edit Delete
Moderate: Hide this post

I LOVE books! And I HATE when people say that too. There is some real cinimatic genius out there


Fight Club. The writer of the book [chuck p.] said he actually liked the ending to the movie better than the ending he wrote.

Its happens sometimes.


But for the most part... books are just better. They let you espace into a world, and its fun, and it helps people NOT be idiots.

Edit Delete
Moderate: Hide this post

i mean, movies can be great like the Dark Knight but most of the time the book is better

Edit Delete
Moderate: Hide this post

I love love love books, for the most part films are over paid for how little they are worth. I have a libray o over 500 novels, and im only 19. Im in love with the written work, and would never pick a movie over a book. If i had to choose bettween only watching movies, and never reading, or only books but no movies. Books would always be the frist choice, no questions asked. I love books, something about them is soo much more magical when they are well writen, the way you can breathe what the character breathes, taste and see what they do, but never be limited to someone elses ideas.

Edit Delete
Moderate: Hide this post

I love both. But I lovelovelovelove to read. My nose has been buried in a book ever since I could read.

Edit Delete
Moderate: Hide this post

oh yes. Tara, you are so right. Some books are just not made into good movies.

Edit Delete
Moderate: Hide this post

You get much more information from books, about the actual story and other things and you can escape into books as Dis said and someone who doesn't love reading or has no interest in it seems ridiculous. Books seem more...perminant to films and the internet. You can make a book your own so if someone comes along and makes it into a film it will be different to how you saw it in your head, sometimes its good, or interesting, sometimes its just crap. I like books and films, but films based on comics or books or another film seem tainted. When I read I feel all intellegent and cultured lol Happy

Edit Delete
Moderate: Hide this post

For a long time I argued that books were better than films, but then I started taking media and film and realised actually how much effort goes into making a good film.

I'm doing a project on adaptations now and it does seem to mainly go that the books are better than films, but what I've found is that they're pretty hard to compare because they're completely different art forms. You can't really compare a painting with a photograph, because they require different types of talents. The Dark Knight is a VERY nice adaptation of the Frank Miller graphic novel, although I suspect that comic books are a lot easier to transfer into films because they're more visual (like Sin City - the film has basically the same shots as the comic). I'm going to read Fight Club because I've heard countless times that the film is better than the book, but I may be bias now because I love the film so wholeheartedly.

I just think...films of books are funny sometimes because it's one person's interpretation of a book, and everyone takes a book differently. For example, I thought Alex in A Clockwork Orange should be really dainty and pretty, but he's not in Stan Kubrick's.

I don't really think films or books are better though. There are just as many shit books as shit films, as good books and good films. It's just what you're into. But yes, it annoys me when people only watch films and don't read books (especially if they're crap films)

Edit Delete
Moderate: Hide this post

This now off subject, but I love Fight Club! Chuck Palahniuk writes such brilliant books. I'm a huge fan of his Happy

Edit Delete
Moderate: Hide this post

Have you read survivor? That was good. And they are making another movie on another book it has just escaped my mind which one though.

OH by the way I am talking about Chuck. (=

Edit Delete
Moderate: Hide this post

Survivor is the only book I've read by Palahniuk, and I LOVE it. There are rumours that there's going to be a film of it - there was meant to be one a few years ago, but then 9/11 happened so they couldn't do a film about plane hijacking. Even though he's not a terrorist, he's being lovely about it. There's a movie of...Choke possibly coming out? I'm sure I read that earlier..

Edit Delete
Moderate: Hide this post


Reply