Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I know many who disagree with me but i've always felt the LOTR movie trilogy was better then the books. I'd note that i read the books when i was younger (and in my 50's "younger" means a long time ago lol) and i never re-read it nor had any deep connection to it. The movies however, i've watched multiple times and each viewing is as incredible as the previous one. For me this is one of the rarities as most often a movie just cant touch what i "saw" when i read the book.
There are others that are close, just seems so often someone takes a good current book and rushes out a 2 hour movie version to capitalize on it's popularity not worrying so much about the quality.
For years I couldn't understand why people are so insistent on claiming the book is better than the movie. I just figured it out, and I feel stupid now for not thinking of this sooner.
When you read a book you are creating a new world that is yours. The story is being told, but YOU are building a mental-movie of it as you read. So, when the movie version comes out and it's not the way YOU seen it, then automatically you are turned off by it.
Chances are the Director shot the movie in the way that he created it in his mind as he read the book.
Just something I have been fascinated with. Why do you think people tend to like the book better? Is my theory legit?
I usually think the book is better. One notable exception is Jaws, which was way better than the book in my opinion (I actually think the book is terrible compared to the movie). The Exorcist is another (but the book is still pretty good) and To Kill a Mockingbird comes close (the book is a classic but so is the movie). There's a few others, but only a few. As a rule, I think the book is better probably because the movie never completely follows the book and the book tells the story as it was intended (in the case of Jaws, I think the movie improved the story; in the Exorcist, it brought the story to life better).
For years I couldn't understand why people are so insistent on claiming the book is better than the movie. I just figured it out, and I feel stupid now for not thinking of this sooner.
When you read a book you are creating a new world that is yours. The story is being told, but YOU are building a mental-movie of it as you read. So, when the movie version comes out and it's not the way YOU seen it, then automatically you are turned off by it.
Chances are the Director shot the movie in the way that he created it in his mind as he read the book.
Just something I have been fascinated with. Why do you think people tend to like the book better? Is my theory legit?
I think you're correct. I read a lot and when the books are really good and detailed you automatically build your own imagine of how things are. For example I read fifty shades and now I see clips of the movie being made and I really think it's going to be disappointing, even the actors they've chosen for the film aren't what I thought they would be.
I always understand when they have to cut things out due to time constraints in the movie, but what I can never understand is when they make changes to content that is in the movie that are blatantly unnecessary. It's almost like they just want to put their own touch on the story, and try make it their own when it's usually not. For me, 9 times out of 10 the book is always better though
For years I couldn't understand why people are so insistent on claiming the book is better than the movie. I just figured it out, and I feel stupid now for not thinking of this sooner.
When you read a book you are creating a new world that is yours. The story is being told, but YOU are building a mental-movie of it as you read. So, when the movie version comes out and it's not the way YOU seen it, then automatically you are turned off by it.
Chances are the Director shot the movie in the way that he created it in his mind as he read the book.
Just something I have been fascinated with. Why do you think people tend to like the book better? Is my theory legit?
There is just as much interpretation in movies. You have to read an actor's face to tell what the character is thinking, while in a book a whole page will be dedicated to the character's processing of the events, and little is left to interpretation. Books tell the story from the inside and you make the shell, while movies give you the shell and you make the inside.
All of Brett Easton Ellis's books are so disturbing to read that I don't think I could handle the movies.
I saw the movie before reading the book. The movie wasn't all that great either, but it was a masterpiece compared to the book. Maybe it was just all the hopelessness, bisexuality, and rich people doing nothing with their lives except partying and doing drugs. The first thing the guy does when he gets home from college is sleep with a guy, and then goes on to sleep with his high school girlfriend. They're all coke-heads. If I read it today, I wouldn't have finished it, but back then I had a rule to finish every book I started.
I usually think the book is better. One notable exception is Jaws, which was way better than the book in my opinion (I actually think the book is terrible compared to the movie). The Exorcist is another (but the book is still pretty good) and To Kill a Mockingbird comes close (the book is a classic but so is the movie). There's a few others, but only a few. As a rule, I think the book is better probably because the movie never completely follows the book and the book tells the story as it was intended (in the case of Jaws, I think the movie improved the story; in the Exorcist, it brought the story to life better).
I read Jaws, and it was awful. But that was one of those books based on the movie, not the other way around. I think Star Wars had a book based on the movie too. I don't know if they do that anymore, but it used to be a thing.
Books are better because you are inside the characters heads. Movies are like cheat sheets for the book and worse still the directer tends to put his own spin on it.
Case in point Dune by Frank Herbert
Any of the King books made into movies.
I saw the movie before reading the book. The movie wasn't all that great either, but it was a masterpiece compared to the book.
Wasn't Less than Zero made into a movie as well? I must have missed the symbolism in his books. One depraved individual. American Psycho
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
