I think ultimately I would probably rather read the book. There have only been a few movies based on books that I really feel have lived up to the hype.
Here are a couple of examples.
The book Sahara by Clive Cussler is a really great book. It is just some good fun action adventure stuff that follows the lead character Dirk Pitt across the globe.
The star they had play Dirk Pitt in the movie is a great actor and I really enjoy him in the movie, but he wasn't a representation of the character that was described by the author. I think the movie was good. The book was fantastic and separately I appreciate them both, but I don't think the one does the other justice.
Another example of this is Timeline by Michael Crichton. The book was totally mind blowing. It was probably one of my most favorite books I have read. The movie while entertaining was just not what it could have been. They left some key things out that I really feel progressed the story and it was just too bad that they didn't have them in the movie like they did in the book.
I think the adaptations of Lord of the Rings were pretty decent. Likewise Jurassic Park as a good movie.
Ender's Game is another one that just fell flat for me. The book is so phenomenal and the movie just didn't do it justice at all. Starship Troopers is another example of that. While the book could be a bit dry at times with all of the philosophical ramblings while the main character was in class I feel the movie took way too many liberties to come across as a straight action film.
Finally, I will talk about The Hunger Games. My wife and I have read the books, but we have not yet seen the movies. I am not sure if we will as it happens. We have a picture in our minds of what the characters look like and how they act. To have that dashed away by some actor or actress on the screen is kind of disheartening.
If I had to choose only one, I would definitely choose only reading the book. Our mind can paint a picture that no director/producer/studio/actor can replicate.
I'm probably in the minority here but I would choose watching the movie version instead of reading a 500+ page book. Quite frankly the reason is because I just don't have the luxury of time to read something that long. (Movies only take 1-2 hours at most) XD
I however will have to agree with the majority here that books are most often than not superior to movies. I think the main reason for that is because: Movies are restrained by time and budget!
An author can just put ALL the details, scenarios, sub-plots or whatever he/she wants in a book. If the author wants to set up a big Dragon War that would involve a lot of dragons fighting, he could just put it all into words. In books, one's imagination has no limit!
That however is not applicable to movies as they are being restrained by budget. I've read an article months ago about the dragon in Game of Thrones that seems to cost millions of dollars to make. And that is only 3 big dragons! Now imagine if a movie relies on pure special effects and animation. In order to get good results for a live-action movie, they either would have to increase their budget or just create one with a passable special effect due to budget constraint.
Again, books are not limited to anything. If the author decided to add a hundred sub-plots to make the book interesting he can just extend the number of pages in his book, but same can not be said for movies as they are bound to time which usually is just under 2 hours. What some movies do is take risk and cut the book into two parts in the movie just in the case of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.
I would prefer to read a book more than watching the movie of the same title. Usually, movies cut short some of the important aspects of the book. There are many small details that are usually missing in the movie. Sometimes, the film directors change the story in the way they would like. Some movies have endings that are different from the books.
Sometimes I spend lots of hours reading a book. I think this question is something about the battle of those who love reading books and those who love movies but doesn't read book instead.
Sometimes I head to the cinema to watch the movie that is based on the book to get a visual look of what those characters would look in real life. Then when I read the next book, I could imagine what the places look like and what they
Are going to Do.
Books are the original contents of authors and only the author can really present out what his true visions are and the film director would have presented it different. Reading the book also adds in the different languages and add on my vocabulary.
Like x men. Usually when I see x men, in any of its movies, so far I havent seen wolverine in his signatuee yellow and black suit. It would be cool to see that.
It's not easy to answer this question, I'd say it depends.
Books can be fascinating, full of detailed descriptions. You can enjoy a story throughout the pages and imagine yourself the scenes and characters based on the writer's description. This is the best part.
When you're watching a movie, all of that is already given, not to mention that the actors impersonating the characters can add their own value to the story, which can be both good or bad, depending on the cast. The script is always a shorter version of the book, can't follow the story to the letter because that's basically impossible. Some scripts are good, others are bad, and have little to do with the original story.
Some people tend to read the book and watch the movie as well, not necessarily in this order. I used to do the same but it's not ideal because one is always better than the other and i ended up regretting my choice. Usually the book is way more better but there was a case when it was vice versa. It was an Italian TV series that I see first and then i had the chance to read the book. It was a total shock, I couldn't believe my eyes. The book was awful, and the translation had a lot to do with it. The movie was full of wonderful places and the actors were just amazing.
Now, if i read the book first, I wait some time before watching the adaptation. This time can be a few months or can be a year or two. This way I can avoid disappointment, or not, who knows?
I for one prefer to read books rather than to watch movies about them. I love books. I always have. But the reason I do is because books are generally better than their cinematic counterpart. A book is the totality of events, thoughts and feelings of the characters. It expresses each character in a way that movies can't. This is because movies are limited to two hours and there's only so much you can do with that. But with books, the only limit is your imagination.
There are very few movies that were better than their books. The truth is, no matter how you spin it, books will always contain more details than movies can produce. And there are some things in books that can't even be done in movies for fear of exceeding the budget. I really enjoy reading books and sadly I've always been disappointed when their movies were released. If you still doubt me then read these books and watch their movies
I could go on forever but lets stop here. These are books that had movies made from them. Read up and watch the movies again and you'll be just as disappointed in the films as I am
That decision will depend a lot on how I classify the book/movies. Is it educational and/or entertainment.
I will prefer reading a book, there is something that makes the lessons stick to you when you get the information from a book. I think it has to do with you forming the pictures on your own. The author of the book ofcourse paints the pictures, but you create the images (imagination) your own way.
With reading a book, it is either you are in sync with the author or you are not. And when you are, it is much more fun and educational. I also believe reading a book makes you smarter, it is not the reading that makes you smart but the creativity that comes from constructing the images in your head. You are more likely to be using both sides of your brain when reading, digesting and creating the images.
Movies best serve you when you are majorly in for the entertainment, the fun. With movies, it is hard to concentrate on the important messages. In a movie, there are lot of things happening at the same time that you miss the real message. Swallowing impulsively during a movie scene or even an unusual blinking means something, but the audience may miss it or not pay attention to that body language which is always spelt out with emphasis in a book.
If it is a subject I really to know much about and even the little details about, give me a book on it. For entertainment purpose only, then I will go for a movie on it.
I also like to see the movie based on the book.
Sometimes there is even more.
For example in the case of the "The Phoenix and the Carpet" by E. Nesbit.
First, I have read the book (free Kindle eBook from,the Project Gutenberg website), and then I watched a TV Mini-series (released in 1997) about the book, and then I watched the movie (released in 1995) about the book.
I'll prefer to watch the movie because that's where you can feel all the actions that can't be portrayed in the book.
Like the Harry Potter book and movie... When I watched the movie the actions were real and visible but checking out the book, you'll only read the actions which are not tangible.
So I'll choose to watch the movie, but sometimes most scenes from the book aren't recorded in the movie or sometimes it's tweaked to show another scene.
@Iqbaladan, Most importantly i will going to read the book before watching the movie because, we know that movies always hold the "Commercial" aspect and sometimes they will not going to showcase every aspect of the real story and inturn sometimes they try to bring their own stuff into it.
Wishing you an great day and stay blessed. 🙂
I prefer to read the book because it is a unique, particular experience. The imagination starts to fly and the characters and actions are made in our mind. It is a real pleasure to carry the book with which we are hooked everywhere and be able to read a few lines anywhere. Now, if a film comes out based on a book I read, I don't refuse to see it, but it's another kind of experience that, compared to reading, reading wins first place.
Watching a movie about a book makes you see the various character in the book in action. It brings the book to life and makes you understand such book and the various characters in it better.
Between reading a book and watching a movie about such I don't think anyone is better than the other. You will appreciate the movie about the book better if you've read the book previously and vice versa. Just watching a movie about a book without having read the book before won't have that much fun. Though watching a movie requires lesser attention and brain power than reading
It all depends if it is fiction or based on real life events.
I think if tit is based on fact then you need to read the book. Most films will change things and shorten key moments. it is hard for a film to depict everything into a 90 minute show.
Fictional stories it isn't as important so I would probably watch the film.
Since I am both a movie lover and a book lover, I still end up watching the movie of the books I have read. Oftentimes though I get disappointed because my imagination has better pictures than the movies - which should be understandable since my imagination does not have to deal with production costs for CGs, location, props, etc.
Movies can be good. Books are better.
When you watch a movie, you see what the director wants you to see. You’re looking at the on-screen projection of his thoughts, his interpretation, his imagination.
When you read a book, you cooperate with the author to build the characters, the scene, the situation, the drama from your own imagination. The reader is very much part of that process. It’s far more intimate and it’s far closer to becoming involved in the story than sitting in a cinema or in your armchair watching somebody else’s ideas play out.
I’m sure there must be movies that I’ve enjoyed more than the book but, honestly, I can’t think of one.
As indicated by me, perusing a book is superior to viewing a motion picture whenever!
Books have a considerable measure of points of interest over movies. Some of them are:
Perusing books enables us to get into the character's head. We become acquainted with precisely what the characters experience, their intentions,motivations, and how they see the world around them.The degree to which motion pictures can deal with this is constrained. This is on the grounds that they are exceptionally subject to the on-screen characters' responses and articulations, which aren't as viable as having their musings being perused out to us.
Books can make huge, profoundly point by point districts through the intensity of words themselves. While perusing a book, we are in a split second transported to any edge of the world(or outside our reality)! Motion pictures regularly require a high spending plan to repeat the dimension of detail accomplished in the books.
Books can incorporate, alongside the fundamental plot, various subplots and backstories, every one of which is a piece of the master plan. Films are confined by their running time, and ca exclude a great deal of subtleties.
Ultimately,a motion picture is just merely 2– 3 hours; a book is an affair! Just a genuine book-sweetheart will have the capacity to portray the euphoric inclination one gets as he grasps a book, gradually experiencing the pages and eating up every single section, line and word without bounds. This is an inclination that you can never get while viewing a movie.