Book, definetly! My friend and I are going up to Barnes and Noble for a midnight-book thing. It's going to be so much fun, but I'll be sad when I finally realize that it's over!
2007-07-01 07:01:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The next book. The books tend to get steadily longer up to Order of the Phoenix, then Half Blood Prince drops down (Deathly Hallows is going to be the second longest) thus you'd expect the movies to be longer as well (and it would be nice if they decided to break the movies into two pieces due the the increasing length of the books, that way they'd get most of the book in). Sadly, that isn't the case. The movie with the longest running time is also the second shortest book, Chamber of Secrets at 161 minutes. Goblet of Fire, which should have been the longest before the release of Order of the Phoenix later this month, comes in at 157 minutes with quite a lot cut out to make it a single movie (and the studio wanted Newell to break it into two halves so as to get as much of the book into the movie as possible, but Cuaron told him he could get away with making one by eliminating most of the "bulky" subplots). This makes it just five minutes longer than Sorcerer's Stone, which is adapted from the shortest book in the series. Then you come to the 144 minute long Prisoner of Azkaban, adapted from a book that is 139 pages longer than the first book and 96 pages longer than the second book. It should have been a longer movie, but it wasn't.
Now we've got Order of the Phoenix about to be released. The longest book in the series, should be the longest movie of the series. But at a 138 minute run time, it's going to be the shortest movie so far. The last two movies had plenty cut out of them and were a little rushed. Prisoner of Azkaban felt even more rushed than Goblet of Fire. How much of the book are we loosing in Order of the Phoenix and how rushed is it going to feel?
We'll know how well done the movie was once it comes out.
2007-07-01 14:40:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by knight1192a 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
book you get more information when you read them the movie can't have everything but sometime the movie leaves out the wrong things, for instance the third book is a great book, but the movie the leave out so much stuff and it seems like the school year is only a couple of days. Yet I think the 2nd book was a little bit worse than the movie because they added more details
2007-07-01 15:32:05
·
answer #3
·
answered by Ian M 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Definitely the Book. I can wait to see the movie, but I will be there at midnight for the book, that is full of stuff we don't already know, unlike the movie.
2007-07-01 14:32:03
·
answer #4
·
answered by nanners454 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The book. I have been waiting since the last one came out. The waits are long but well worth it. I enjoy reading them. I usually read the book pretty fast so I can know what happens then I read it again more slowly.
2007-07-01 19:59:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
DON'T WATCH THE MOVIE IF YOU HAVEN'T READ THE BOOKS!!!!!! For me, I've read all the books so I'm ready for the 7th book! I can't wait.
In the movies they leave out a lot of details and parts of the story.
2007-07-01 14:17:18
·
answer #6
·
answered by hat 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The book, definitely. I love the movies, but they cannot compare to the books. The movie versions always annoy me because they change things to make them more dramatic or put in really unimportant things instead of including the really important ones.
2007-07-01 14:01:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by Liz 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The book, hands down.
2007-07-03 14:25:14
·
answer #8
·
answered by Kai Finn 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Read fast and you'll be excited for the book, like me!! I'd advise not watching the moviebefore reading it...just my opinion.
2007-07-01 18:31:13
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I want never to have to hear about Harry Potter again.
2007-07-05 13:02:27
·
answer #10
·
answered by ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ 4
·
0⤊
0⤋