book or film?

Question

whats best book or film,read da vinci code excellent film so so .read lord of the rings excellent film fair.what say you?

Answer 1

I read all of those books and saw the movies as well. Nothing beats the book, though. No matter how hard the movie makers try, they can usually never capture the same "essence" that the author was trying to portray. I hate it when the movie strays from the book, too!

With the LOTR trilogy I did something that I have never done before. I saw the movies first and then read the books. Usually I do the opposite. That was an interesting experience because it helped me have a visual of the characters while I was reading the books. When I started reading them I could not put the books down! I read all three (as well as The Hobbit) in three days! Then I watched the movies again after I read the books. It was really a pretty cool experience.

Answer 2

I have found that books are best due to the details the film lack. It's pretty easy to watch the film in comparison to sitting there longer than a film to read a book, but reading the book is worth it. I've read The DaVinci Code and that was a great book, even better than the movie. Also with shows like LOTR, I've only read the hobbit, but it placed me even more indepth with the places and characters. I'm a Harry Potter book fan. Yea, one of those geeks...hehe, not really, but some people really hate on the movies and they are okay but nothing compared to the book. The book doesn't just appeal to the young like the movies but mainly cross to older groups and has a lot more feel to it than the film portrays. Overall, watching a good movie that is based on a movie is fun, but the book itself is mostly likely better.

Answer 3

Films are great, they produce a very accurate visual of what your reading, but the only problem with them, is they lack detail due to time frame of the film, and it only lasts average of 2-3 hours.

The book, much more detail, something to do at night instead of watching boring gameshows. It lasts much longer, you can get a good week out of an 800 page book.

Can't really say one of them is better, because their aimed at different audiences, books are for older people who enjoy reading and some teenagers who are sensible minded. The film aims at a less patient audience mostly (not saying everyone who watches is like this just mostly).

So depends on who you are, and personal tastes. A combination of both is always nice, and reading the book after the film is enlightening and explains the gaps within the film which you seriously need to read the book to fully understand.

Answer 4

I read The Da Vinci Code - boring and amateur - hate the film - badly acted and missing key plotlines.
Love the LoTRs books and films.
Usually I choose book over film - rarely disappointed by the books.

Answer 5

Harry Potter, BOOK! The film misses out half of the book, some of the things that happen become confusing because once you have read the book you think you know what is coming next.

This is the only book I have read, and that was an English assignment. Obv didn't do to well in English lol.

Answer 6

Books. Nothing can match the pictures your own imagination creates while reading. Also, Very few books are short enough to transfer all of it to a 1 1/2 - 2 hour movie, so often the movie needs to employ shortcuts that will leave something lacking.

Answer 7

Hi. I have read many books by Stephen King, mostly excellent. But none of the movies did the books justice, In my opinion.

Answer 8

I always find the book is better than the film

Answer 9

Usually I find that the book is better than the film; authors write in ways that film can never hope to copy or reproduce.

Answer 10

sorry but i think it is is one of the worst books i never read. i could not get involved in this story.to much religious overtones. the only interesting part was about the medieval witch hunts . after that i closed the pages shut and said forget it. lotr's ? no one Will ever compare to Jackson's vision from book to film