• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

books Vs films

Mike182

Flaming Queer
i saw the "music Vs Television" thread, and thought of a "book verses film" thread

i love books, i love reading a story that fully encompasses you, the kind of story that you can't stop reading when you're at home, and can't stop thinking about when your at work

i would rather read a book before i watch the film, because if i watch the film, then read the book, it doesn't have as much 'mystery' because i know the story line, so i get fed up with the book

if i read the book first, when i see the film, although i enjoy the film, the experience is never as good as reading the book

what do others think about this?
 

jeffrey

†ßig Dog†
I enjoy a good book, but cannot find the time to read that much. Used to get audio tapes of books while driving. Dean Koontz is my favorite.
 

Green Gaia

Veteran Member
Books are always superior to the films. I've never seen a movie that was based on a book that I preferred over the book. I usually still like the movies, though.
 

Aqualung

Tasty
I pretty much hate watching film versions of books. For one, they're usually way different, and cut out some of the best stuff. For two, a lot of books are internal dialogue, and there's really no effective way of transferring that to film. For three, I always imagine the books how I want them to look (like with the protaganist looking a certain way, and the scenery being a certain way) and movies always come and shatter that, and then I'm stuck thinking a certain way about the book.
 

standing_alone

Well-Known Member
I always take a book over a movie. Books involve the reader more than a movie involves the viewer. With books, you get to imagine the setting, the characters, etc. In movies, it's already done for you. And in my experience with books, I almost always find myself relating to some kind of chracter and seem to get to know him/her better and want to know what happens to him/her than characters on a film. In my opinion, books are superior to film.
 

cardero

Citizen Mod
I prefer graphic novels over television and books with just prose. You sort of get the best of both worlds. If done correctly and respectfully the marriage of pictures and word adds a new challenge and delight to the reader. I do most of my book reading at work so it is safe to assume that I read more than I watch television. I normally do not get the time to read at home, so that when I arrive home late at night, I can unwind with a good movie till bedtime. On the subject of books made into movies, I only saw one movie that translated the book accurately and that movie was The Tin Drum. They were only able to squeeze two out of the three acts of the book into the film but they did it authentically.
 

Pussyfoot Mouse

Super Mom
Yep, the majority of the time, the movie just doesn't stand up to the book. I think it's because we all have our own individual imaginations and we use this when we read. So the person doing the film probably has a totally different way of seeing the characters or has their own personal feeling about certain events in the book. I guess there's a lot more into reading than I thought. I think I'm gonna run off to the library on my lunch hour. ;)
 

gnomon

Well-Known Member
While I prefer the book more than a film about 99% of the time there are a few occasions where the film is actually superior in my opinion. Usually in the adaptation of a short story or novella. 'Shawshank Redemption' is one of those rare adaptations. Actually the only one I can think of at the moment. But thats just my opinion.
 

Pussyfoot Mouse

Super Mom
gnomon said:
While I prefer the book more than a film about 99% of the time there are a few occasions where the film is actually superior in my opinion. Usually in the adaptation of a short story or novella. 'Shawshank Redemption' is one of those rare adaptations. Actually the only one I can think of at the moment. But thats just my opinion.
Unfortunately, I did not read the book, but it was indeed and excellent film. I must agree that there is on the rare occasion, a film that does exceed the book in greatness. :)
 

Ðanisty

Well-Known Member
I usually prefer the book, but I don't get as much time to read as I'd like, so if a film version is available, I watch it. For instance, the Lord of the Rings books are probably fantastic, but I don't have the time to read them. My favorite book is being made into a film and it terrifies me. I'm so scared they are going to artistically rape the story. The main character is one I've come to love as if he was a real person and a dear friend. As silly as that may sound.
 

Atheist_Dave

*Foxy Lady*
I love books because I can make the characters look however I want, I can imagine what they would look like, and how the events would look if they were acted out. Movie special effects have no comparison to the human imagination. Whenever I see the film afterwards, im dissapointed at how poor it is compared to my own version.

Peace x
 

Kowaki

Member
usually the book is better than the movie, but not for The Count of Monte Cristo. I saw the movie, loved it, then started to read the book. It was horrendously boring. I got to page 452, then stopped, i was so burned out. NEVER READ THAT BOOK!
 

Ðanisty

Well-Known Member
Kowaki said:
usually the book is better than the movie, but not for The Count of Monte Cristo. I saw the movie, loved it, then started to read the book. It was horrendously boring. I got to page 452, then stopped, i was so burned out. NEVER READ THAT BOOK!
Are you kidding??? I loved the movie and I'm reading the book right now. It's one of the best books I've ever read!
 

Mike182

Flaming Queer
Roland said:
i rather watch the movie. better graphics.
i can see where you are coming from, but i would argue that the book stirs the imagination, which is better than any image you can capture on screen
 

dawny0826

Mother Heathen
I really preferred the movie of Gone With the Wind over the book.

But generally, I don't think movies do books justice.
 

Master Vigil

Well-Known Member
See, I make movies. So I'm a little bit partial to them. :D Humans are so visually stimulated these days. The ability to evoke emotion with use of visual and audial stimulation is amazing to me.

When I view movies and books, I view them as two completely different mediums. A book is a book, and a movie is a movie. When a book is made into a film, it has a different feel than the book. That's because it's not a book. That's my opinion anyway.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Used to get audio tapes of books while driving.
You mean you didn't read and drive at the same time?

No matter how long the book (slams down the Uncut/Unedited version of Stephen Kings The Stand), I always like them more than the movie. I do understand though, if all of Lord of the Rings was in the movie, we would have had 6-8 hour movies, and if all of The Stand (which is just short of 1400 pages) were included, well, it would take several months, rather than days, to watch it. Watching Firestarter, after reading it, really p***** me off, since almost every detail was changed. The book was much better.
 
Top