Which is better: movie based on book or book itself?

PhotonicGuy · Post by **PhotonicGuy** » 02 Jul 2010, 12:49

What do you think, the movies based on books are usually better or worse than the books they are based on? For example, Misery (the movie) won at least an Oscar, but I think Stephen King's original book is far better, the movie is nothing compared to the book.

Cylan · Post by **Cylan** » 02 Jul 2010, 18:17

Well, I think it really depends on the book, and the movie themselves... I for the most part prefer books to their movie counterparts... but there are some movies I enjoy almost equally, but in a different way if that makes any sense haha.

PhotonicGuy · Post by **PhotonicGuy** » 05 Jul 2010, 11:37

Maybe I can extend the question a little - how it affects you if you read the book and then see the movie, or see the movie and then read the book? Is it possible to get over the first impression? (for example, if you loved the book, can you like the movie more? if you hated the movie, can you even try to read the book?).

andr70 · Post by **andr70** » 06 Jul 2010, 06:26

It's different with every book. I think it depends on the director a lot about the film.

PhotonicGuy · Post by **PhotonicGuy** » 08 Jul 2010, 06:15

Yes, but I happened to see movies directed by renowned directors, which were not rising to the book's value (used as a basis for scenario).

Hikkomijian · Post by **Hikkomijian** » 10 Jul 2010, 01:34

In my opinion the book will be always better than the movie, though it doesn't mean the movie is bad.

PhotonicGuy wrote:how it affects you if you read the book and then see the movie, or see the movie and then read the book?

Once I watched "Lord of the rings" and i thought that was great film, but right after I read the book, the movie seemed (and still seems) so unsophisticated, so simple that I don't feel like watching it anymore.

laci_baby · Post by **laci_baby** » 11 Jul 2010, 01:31

True, it depends on the book. I absolutely fell in love with The English Patient when i read it, but i have to admit that the movie was far better than i could ever have imagined. I'm really bad about books being turned into movies. If i read the book, i have to watch the movie, but the books are normally way better.

layla74 · Post by **layla74** » 12 Jul 2010, 04:59

I prefer books, you can imagine the figures or plots behind books but movies are limited.

PhotonicGuy · Post by **PhotonicGuy** » 12 Jul 2010, 09:11

I loved English Patient - the movie - and I didn't read the book because I was sure I will be disappointing. But I also heard that the book is pretty different (many things changed in the movie). Is this true? Maybe I will read the book after all.

laci_baby · Post by **laci_baby** » 12 Jul 2010, 23:45

PhotonicGuy wrote:I loved English Patient - the movie - and I didn't read the book because I was sure I will be disappointing. But I also heard that the book is pretty different (many things changed in the movie). Is this true? Maybe I will read the book after all.

Yea, you should definetely. Some things change, like most book/movie relations, but the book is classic. You shoud read it. And hey, if you dont like it, atleast you said you tried, but you found a movie that was better than the book. And thats rather rare. So either way, you win.

PhotonicGuy · Post by **PhotonicGuy** » 13 Jul 2010, 08:16

Thanks, laci_baby. You're right! If I don't like the book , then I can tell that I found a movie better than the book itself..

redandyellow92 · Post by **redandyellow92** » 13 Jul 2010, 22:21

I have found the movies to be better than the books very rarely. To me, it is always more interesting to let the mind wander and paint its own pictures than to sit back and see what Hollywood can do with it. A good example, in my opinion, is the story "The Deadzone" by Stephen King. I think the book was extremely well-written and had a lot of room for imagination. The movie, however, was unable to keep my attention.

PhotonicGuy · Post by **PhotonicGuy** » 16 Jul 2010, 05:44

redandyellow92, you are perfectly right. Indeed, the book lets you freedom to imagine your story, while the movie shows you already a version of the story. I guess exactly because of this, when you read a good book (and you put your imagination at work) and then you see the movie, it's possible that you will not like it (because the director has a different version of the story than you).

tigeropig · Post by **tigeropig** » 10 Aug 2010, 20:39

I like books and I also like movies. The things I don't like about movies is that when you read the book you can see the character the way you want to.In the movies unless you based your idea of how the character looks on the movie star playing him/her they will look completely different. So it changes the whole movie. Also they have to cut out parts that are in the books because they dont want to make super long movies(there are some exceptions). And if you wacth a movie first then you will except the movie to be like the book. It will be different if it is better or not that is your opionion.

carole9087 · Post by **carole9087** » 13 Aug 2010, 16:17

I usually prefer books to movies but some movies help me understand the books. I'm one of those Sparknotes people who need to know what is happening (especially in the long classics).