Do you like the books, or the movies better?
I honestly like reading the books a lot. I feel more connected. Plus, I’m always disappointed when I see the movie. BUT! Just recently I saw a preview for my absolutely favorite book. Hopefully, I won’t be disappointed!
Which do you prefer?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
19 Answers
100 percent books. They let the characters and plot develop way more than a two hour movie.
Movies. I am not much of a book person, I wish I was. I am a very slow reader, and lose interest quickly.
Definitely 100% the book. Most times I don’t even watch the movie if I’ve read the book because the movie will be so disappointing lacking detail. One exception was Stephen King’s book It. Great book, good movie. And if a movie is good, and I happen to see it first, I will make a point of reading the book. You get so much more detail when you read the book.
I like them both, but if I had to give up one, it would definitely be movies. Books are keepers.
Movies! Books are smelly.
I love books, so I’d rather read and use my imagination than watch the movie version which is usually a disappointment.
I like both. The books leave more to your imagination, but the movies (if done properly) put the book right in front of your face, in live action. It can be incredible. I really loved watching the Lord of the Rings books and the Harry Potter books be made into movies!
Just out of curiosity, which book-made-movie are you all excited about right now? Hunger Games?
Depends on the book and movie. I prefer the books, usually, but sometimes the movies trim the unnecessary fat off a boring book (I’m looking at you, Girl With The Dragon Tattoo and The Godfather).
Sometimes a book is great, but the movie changes major parts of it for a much better result (like Fight Club and Jurassic Park).
Sometimes a book is nearly perfect, and any attempt to film it is doomed (Harry Potter and Fear and Loathing In Las Vegas), though you respect the attempt.
@filmfann You’re absolutely right about Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. The movie is much more exciting than the book, although the book is still fabulous.
I’ll go with Boobs. I like them better than movies or books. :)
I like both. Sometimes the movie helps me understand the book better (Like Water for Chocolate). Some times it makes the book more alive than my imagination did (The Color Purple). Some times the book is much better than the movie and I’m disappointed (Can’t think of an example at the moment.)
Generally, I like reading the book first because there’s so much detail that movies leave out due to time constraints. But, that’s why I like the movie version also, because I just can’t read a 500 pg. book in 2 hours. So, I shall put it this way, the book makes me fall in love with the story, but the movie keeps that love alive.
Books. Unless I was the director.
It tends to be whichever I see or read first.
To me the books are pretty much always better than the movies. Unless you count books that were actually made from movies; Friday the Thirteenth; it happened.
I can only think of one movie I liked better than the book it was based from, Shutter Island. Although I went through the book and the premise was fun, the writing was booooooring. This is, however, opinion and personal taste, so it doesn’t add to much. Books are usually better, in my experience.
Generally, the books are better, because so many details get left out when a movie made. But there are one or two exceptions to the rule, like Phantom of the Opera. The book is as dry as toast and feels more like a skeleton of a good storyline than a fully realized story. The movie adds psychological intrigue and depth of character that’s missing from the novel IMO.
@lonelydragon I disagree about the Phantom of the Opera book. When I got my kindle I downloaded a ton of free classic literature. That was one of them, and I found it so exciting I couldn’t put it down. By far my favourite out of all the classics I’ve read.
@downtide I came to the novel expecting to like it, but it felt very episodic. The point of view shifted randomly and a lot of attention was focused on peripheral characters (like the theater managers) at the expense of the main characters. I wanted to see more interaction between the three main characters. Also, the language was quite stilted (though that could have been a translation issue). Of course, that is just my opinion, and if you like it, there’s nothing wrong with that. If we all liked the same books, what a dull world it would be.
Answer this question