Book VS Movie?

Question

Have you noticed some books would make better movies and are typically much more unbelievable while others are better books but include ideas that a movie couldn't include (like ET really happy with straws) Do you think the market for a read (red) book still exists? to what degree? could it get better?

Answer 1

If the author of a book could have made it into a movie, gthen she would have. Likewise, a book "based on the major motion picture" is never as good.

Consider "Doctor Zhivago." In the book, Yuri Zhivago constantly ruminates about thoughts going on in his head. In the film, the story is all action in the Russian revolution. In a book, you have time to dwell over scenery, thoughts, feelings. In a film, you must capture imagery, action.

Answer 2

I agree with your first part. I think that some books (mostly the sci-fi / fantasy books) like Harry Potter, Eragon, and LOTR are soooo much better than the movie version. But there are some movies based on the book, that I like the movie better. I hate reading Jane Austen, but I love the movies based on her novels.

I think that the market for books still exists. However, I think that people are getting lazy and just choose to go see the movie instead, believing that they are getting the same experience. But like I said before, its not the same. With movie versions, they cut out a lot of important things.

And sometimes, I'll see previews for a movie, and they won't even mention anywhere in the preview that it's based on a book. If there is a movie I want to see, I'll try and read the book first, since 90% of the time, the book is way better.

Answer 3

I think it's different. A book is a totally different experience than a movie. But I agree that some books just don't make great movies, and vice versa.
It does tend to annoy me though, when a book is made into a movie, and the movie isn't at all accurate to the book. I understand that it's their right to make the movie what they want, but as a reader it dissapoints me.