Books & Films

[merlin-1]

When i read books that are then made into movies the movie usually is a disappointment.

[Tikibonbon]

ok, no knockin' the dwarve tossin' till you try it, ok?

[WeeMouse]

Originally posted by Tikibonbon@25 May 2003 - 15:47
ok, no knockin' the dwarve tossin' till you try it, ok?

Duly noted!

[botts]

i always thought the movies of books sucked and hence nearly always stayed away from them...but i saw the harry potter films and think they actually did quite a good job of representing the story and remaining "true" to the books'/author's intentions. i also saw the LOTR films and although they can in no way come close to matching the grandeur of the books, i thought they were, in their own right, stunning pieces of film.

i guess i should also admit here to being one of those people who probably watch more films than i read books, but i think i still prefer a good book to a good film....

botts

[Ad]

I prefer reading the bok first then watching the film its better u can have ur own imagination The lost world for example the movie sucked at the end the book was heaps heaps better

[thegroggman]

Yeah...all Michael Crichton books adopted into films, always end up being inferior to their books (anyone see Sphere). Jurassic Park...was really good...but still paled in comparison to the book. Theyre adapting another one of his novels...Timeline...I loved that book ,and Im hoping for the best in the film...but its highly unlikely...*sigh*...

[hypoluxa3k]

one of the few fiction books i've read (i prefer facts and bios) is snow falling on cedars.
i loved but not watched the movie.

has anyone read and seen it?

[Rat Faced]

A simple book (say a childrens) can be made into a good film...



A decent adult book?

Nah, I prefer my own imagination...the film involves interpretation from so many other people that it just loses the magic of the printed word.

[sArA]

I also get a little fed up with movie maker's insistence on 'sugar soaping'...often going for some human interest, morality tale... This may be why kids books tend to make better films as they often have good triumphs over evil themes anyway.

The harder edged books are never as good cos the movie guys dont have the bottle to stick with the plot.

I also have to agree that my own imagination is usally much better at filling in the details than a team of production execs.

[neil1967]

must say i watch more movies than i read books, though good visual takes on
books(personal opinion of course) would include Catch 22, A Clockwork Orange,
and fear and loathing in las vegas. The feel of each book seems to be captured
perfectly for me, and the soundtrack seems to have alot to do with this,something
books dont always manage to capture, though steven king does somehow when he
quotes lines from songs being played on the radio, or sung by a character.I think
most people mentioned how they prefer to use their imagination, and i totally agree, this to me has to be why a good book beats a film hand down, and probably also why it spoils the movie, we all picture a character in our minds eye
and each reader pictures them diffrently, so it's hardly surprising there's disapointment when bruce willis plays your favourite character in a novel and hes
twenty years too old for the part and crap, casting is almost as important as the
screenplay. the best way to avoid disapintment would have to be.................
STOP READING BLOODY BOOKS AND GO THE PICTURES MORE! no one likes a
well read smart arse.