Do you think that about that:"It's much better to watch the film than read the book"?

Answer 1

Oh no, I'd much rather read the book. More details, more story, and my imagination is not limited by someone else's translation of the story.

Answer 2

Even though I do that to Harry Potter, I hate myslef for it because everyone I know that reads the books goes to see the movie and they always say "The book was better!" and I can't say anything because I don't read Harry Potter. (One day I will read them I'm sure. And then watch the movies all over again!)

But, as for movies that I have seen where I read the book first are:
The Notebook - AMAZING book. Crappy movie.
Message in a Bottle - again, AMAZING book. Crappy movie.
A Walk to Remember - In this case, the book made no sense to me because it didn't have anything to do with the movie except names. (I read this book after I had already seen the movie a million times).

So, whoever makes Nicholas Sparks books into movies, well, they need to go along with the book a little more closely next time.

Answer 3

Most often books are better than the movie. I am a HUGE Harry Potter fan. But, I had seen the first and second movies before I started reading the books. I likes having watched the movie first b/c I could visualize the scenes better. I knew what the characters looked like and could hear their voices when I read. But, like I said, most books are far better than the movies. I say do both.

Answer 4

Almost without exception the book is far superior to a film based on it. The book contains much more character depth and nuances in the story. By the very fact that a film is limited by running time and budget, the subtle and alternate sub-stories get eliminated. I have found that films are merely a bare unsatisfying outline of the original book.

Answer 5

Most of the time the book is better. But I do both. First I read the book so I can create my own visuals, then I watch the movie to see what they came up with.

Answer 6

If you watch the film then you have to rely on seeiong things the way the director and actors and such a re-presenting it to you.
If you read the book its a first hand experience, you get all of the details just as the author intended
a book is much better, films dont really leave much of it to your imagenation

Answer 7

I think that its better to read the book because it has a lot of details that the movies doesn't have. When you read a book you imagine the places and the characters of one way that is particular for you but if you see a movie all the persons will see the same places a same characters. You can enter to the story and imagine yourself as a character.

Answer 8

The book every time. In 'The Da Vinci Code' the film altered the ending and it was just plain silly. A shame really because until that point it was ok. Plus in the film of the books they always have to add a romantic element.

Answer 9

No! No! By watching a moive you may learn the main theme of a book, but reading is a lot more stimulating. Also, by reading the book, you can be sure of the actual story, since movies are often tweaked and changed, and sometimes unfaithful to the book.

:-)

Answer 10

Never!!! What blasphemy! Seriously, I have yet to see a movie adaptation of a book that was at least as good as the book. The only films that even come close are film adaptations of Comic Books.... To me, the movie version is only for those who are too lazy to read the book and imagine it for themselves.

Answer 11

I definitely believe you should read the book before seeing the movie. I agree with most of the posters--the movie always seems to leave something HUGE out! Very few movies, if any, are better than the book!