I know there are several books I never would have picked up if not for the wonderful films such as The Secret Garden, Fried Green Tomatoes, Anne of Green Gables, Pollyanna, The Inheritance, etc. I plan on reading Emma soon because I love the movie Gweneth Paltrow starred in.I know the book is usually better than the movie, but the truth is we are a tv and movie generation.
2006-07-03 10:15:27 · 15 answers · asked by Puff 5 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Movies
There are a lot of movies made after books, but I know there are some books that I would like to see made into movies! But, they usually make popular books into movies don't they? Then it kind of guarantees that a lot of people will want to see the movie.
I think that when a book is made into a movie, you should keep the characters' same physical description (as close as you can get), the characters' same personality, and you should stay fairly faithful to the book (although extra details and things are good). I don't always like when pretty much the only thing that is similar between a book and movie is the main idea, then it almost seems like a completely different story without keeping some of the characters' personality traits and certain story details.
As for books being better than movies, I don't like to compare them like that. They are two different things that entertain different parts of the brain. But, I do think that the story of a book can be better than the story of movie (or vice versa). It makes sense that if the book came first, it's story will be better than the movie's story, and if the movie came first, it's story will be better than the book's story.
2006-07-03 10:36:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I find that I usually end up disappointed by the movie version, with very few exceptions- Jurassic Park, Anne of Green Gables, Forrest Gump (that movie was WAY better than the book). I guess they could keep trying, but sometimes I think it's just too difficult a task to transfer all of the information that you get in a big book to a 2 hour movie- for example the later Harry Potter movies.
2006-07-03 17:40:02 · answer #2 · answered by chelle 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
honestly (being an avid reader and film student) I think that we should find creative writers to write new concepts for films. Yes books that get made into movies bring attention to the books, but whatever happened to the original ideas for movies? I get so tired of seeing movies that I already know the story for because I've read the book, or only being told about books that have been made into movies. There are many great books that could be made into movies, but do you think in our day and age people would actually approve of the subject matter of many of the great books without drastically changing the story to suit the needs of the viewers? Why can't they just produce a good creative script, or perhaps let more of the indie filmmakers, who come up with their own stories make bigger better films? So many people don't read these days because they figure, if it's a good enough book it'll be a movie.
2006-07-03 17:28:29 · answer #3 · answered by Jade 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's probably better than re-makes, but they have made tons of books into movies. In fact, Friday, they just released The Devil Wears Prada, isn't that from a book? Plus the have made The DaVinci Code, 4 of the Harry Potters, The Chronicles Of Narnia(which will have a 2007 sequel), and over 100 more.
2006-07-03 18:22:50 · answer #4 · answered by Mr. Movie 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree.
I just can't stand when people who have read the book go see the movie and say things like, "That's not the way it was in the book."
I think the movie should be able to stand on its own without having to be a direct replica of the book. You shouldn't have to have read the book in order to understand and be entertained by the movie.
2006-07-03 17:20:09 · answer #5 · answered by azheelshock 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yeah, I think that's how most books reach the masses cuz more people pay attention to their television and theater .. I usually run out and read the book before I see the movie. I feel that's a better way to judge which was better. I did that with John Grisham's A Time To Kill and oh how happy I was... equally wonderful but the movie definitley was changed ...
2006-07-03 17:18:10 · answer #6 · answered by Hollyhocks 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i totally agree... books r way better... but also if the make a movie form the book, the movie always ends up sooo not how the book is... but i still agree
2006-07-03 17:18:44 · answer #7 · answered by butterfly effect 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
that is soo true! i mean like only 20% of books are turned into movies. even though the movie has its own virsion than the book, i still like it when they tun them into movies.
2006-07-03 17:23:41 · answer #8 · answered by monkeyfirecracker 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes i agree! there are millions of great books out there that should be made into movies!
2006-07-03 17:19:24 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes, like the book "widow for a year" by john irving. excellent!
2006-07-03 17:32:05 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋