OnlineBookClub.org

I think both. These are two different ways of telling a story and I feel like we should respect both. It does affect me when a movie is a complete let down, for example the Percy Jackson movies. They're a good watch on it's own, but if we've read the books, it's kinda disappointing. Otherwise, I love watching adaptations of books as movies.

Yes. The movie brings the book to life, unless the butcher it.

Absolutely not because 9 times out of 10 they ruin it. The movie always leaves out details that are so significant to the reader and to the story line, so for the person watching they can never really understand where certain characters are coming from and why certain decisions were made to achieve that particular ending. So big no for me I always end up upset.

Few movies are better than the original books. I can only mention a few, including The Godfather, Forrest Gump, Schindler's List, and One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Some adaptations (like the Percy Jackson series and The Maze Runner) are so terrible that it gets embarrassing.

I see no problem with this. Sometimes finishing reading a certain book really imparted on my mind for a long period, making me imagine sets of unforgettable events from the story. Making it as a movie is an ideal option and I concur with this.

Depends on the book.The ones I grew up watching like Oliver Twist, David Copperfield, Kidnapped, The Swiss Family Robinson, 1984, Sherlock Holmes ect. stayed very true to the source material and literally brought the book to life. I think nowadays the book-to-movie adaptation suffers because the movie makers pick and choose only a few elements and details from the book and then do whatever they want with the rest, like re-writing characters, omitting characters, changing the plot twists, changing a character's motivations, changing the lesson of the story ect.

So yes and no I guess, lol.

I am definitely for that, it somehow gives faces to the characters other then the ones you imagines, and if the actors are well chosen it's even better, same like the movie a walk to remember, ma favorite

I honestly lost a lot of faith in book to movie adaptations, but I still get a little excited when I find out I can see my favorite books on the big screen.

Definitely a yes. Takes your imagination into a whole new world with effects of sound and lighting which are absent while reading a book.

In fact, I can't completely agree, as films have often raised a book on a pedestal and given a different point of view and a strange feeling to the audience. Yes, some should not be ruined by their adapted films, but vice versa.

It depends on the type of book. If its a historical, science fiction of fantasy, I always love to see what the writer may have had in mind describing some characters and scenes.

I always read the book before seeing the movie. Regardless of which book it is. I just always enjoy the book more and don’t want the movie to take away from that. I enjoy the experience of a movie, but tend to end up disappointed with the movie adaptation. I think that’s because we fall so in love with characters or story lines and if it’s left out or altered it feels like an insult in a way.

I think it depends on the genre or the book, because what puts me off is that, some films doesn't do the book any justice.
The book sets an expection and I don't think that movies should be made if it can't live up to that expectation.

I think books should be turned into shows rather than movies, so no. Theres not enough time for a movie to have the same plot of a 400-600 page novel, which ends up with a lot of the story being cut out.

There are certain books that I anticiapte to be an official movie. Yet there are some that I’d want to be simply a book and never be a film. It is because some good novels require to be seen as a movie and some lousy books necessitate just to stagnate.