Book vs. Movie

hi!

Do movies based on books ever justify the book? Which do you perfer? Why? Would you rather read the book first or watch the movie first? Explain an experience when a movie based on a book as satisfied you and an experience when it has disappointed you. And most importantly, do you think books should be made into movies? why or why not

~Javz

In almost all the cases I have found books better than the movie. The character sketch a book carries is hardly justified in a 2-3 hr movie.

But recently one movie I saw and was impressed more than the book was 'The Namesake'. The lead characters came to life with Irrfan Khan and Tabu.

Another instance I can remember is 'Forrest Gump'. The movie was a masterwork with Tom Hank as the lead whereas the book was not at all engaging. I lost interest in the book but have seen movie lots of time and still remain one of my favorite.

^^^i agree with you on namesake part. i found the movie more impressing and beautifully depicted in a short span. not a lot of scriptwriters can do that. most movies have to be for 2-3 hours so they need to compress the story which sometimes ruins the story and makes you confused more. sometimes you find the movie worthwhile. but sometime i find books more detail oriented.

If you read the book, the movie is always disappointing. Just b/c books cover a lot of detail that movies can't.
I like movies also, it's for the lazy body; who don't want to spend time reading the book.
Depends on the mood, I like both. I mostly watch movies so I'll go with movies eventhough I know the books are better 😊

Originally posted by: *guesswho*

If you read the book, the movie is always disappointing. Just b/c books cover a lot of detail that movies can't.
I like movies also, it's for the lazy body; who don't want to spend time reading the book.
Depends on the mood, I like both. I mostly watch movies so I'll go with movies eventhough I know the books are better 😊

i understand that part. one time i read a book and then watched the movie. the movie ended and i was still sitting and expecting more to it, my friend said, get up the movie is over. what are you expecting?😳 you should have seen the kind of shocking impression i had for the rest of the day😕 shouldnt have watched the movie.

Sometimes it is book, sometimes it is movie.

There are some effects which an actor can convey more ably on screen than an author doing justice to that emotion by words.

But sometimes, particularly in character sketches, book out does the movie more often than not.

Being a book person, I much prefer the book to the movie - immediate example coming to mind being Harry Potter. No doubt the movie has come up with brilliant imaginative photography and has captured the imagination of the author beautifully, but even without the movie, an average reader could easily imagine Hogwarts Express, the Platform 3/4, the long bearded Dumbledore, quidditch matches etc. But there was so much more which could have been done cinemotographically which was possibly not done due to restraints of time. Thats where the book beats the movie hollow.

Moive is a Group of peoples Art......A book is a writers own Art......So lot of differnce happen....A book can give lot of imagination in our mind, a movie give us the virtual or real picuture as directors view point. both have their own quality. 😊

Originally posted by: greatmaratha

Sometimes it is book, sometimes it is movie.

There are some effects which an actor can convey more ably on screen than an author doing justice to that emotion by words.

But sometimes, particularly in character sketches, book out does the movie more often than not.

Being a book person, I much prefer the book to the movie - immediate example coming to mind being Harry Potter. No doubt the movie has come up with brilliant imaginative photography and has captured the imagination of the author beautifully, but even without the movie, an average reader could easily imagine Hogwarts Express, the Platform 3/4, the long bearded Dumbledore, quidditch matches etc. But there was so much more which could have been done cinemotographically which was possibly not done due to restraints of time. Thats where the book beats the movie hollow.

I completely agree. Books are almost always more satisfying than movies because of the details that the author is able to put into them, and taking Harry Potter as an example, the movie was good for the people who didn't want to read an 800 page book, but it, in my opinion, could never capture the true magic of the book because of JK Rowling's amazing descriptions and attention to detail. I prefer reading the book to watching the movie.

Most of the times, books are better and more entertaining than the movies. The details in the book surpass those in the movies at any given day. The author makes sure that we know how the leaves on the tree are moving and in which direction wind is blowing. Certain times, these things hold a significant place in the story. To depict this kind of things in movie is hard and it may get boring for the viewers if minute details like that are shown as well. As a couple said, Harry Potter is a fresh example. I think the director was great and the technicalities in the film were given great attention as well. But those who have read the books will always say that the movies come nowhere near the books.

But then certain actors fit in so well that the movie turns out to be a masterpiece. As Maya and Raunaq said, Namesake was amazing. Another movie that I think that has done very well is Godfather. I adore the directors and the actors and they have all done a wonderful job in bringing Godfather out of the pages in the book.

Originally posted by: rutumodi915

Most of the times, books are better and more entertaining than the movies. The details in the book surpass those in the movies at any given day. The author makes sure that we know how the leaves on the tree are moving and in which direction wind is blowing. Certain times, these things hold a significant place in the story. To depict this kind of things in movie is hard and it may get boring for the viewers if minute details like that are shown as well. As a couple said, Harry Potter is a fresh example. I think the director was great and the technicalities in the film were given great attention as well. But those who have read the books will always say that the movies come nowhere near the books.

But then certain actors fit in so well that the movie turns out to be a masterpiece. As Maya and Raunaq said, Namesake was amazing. Another movie that I think that has done very well is Godfather. I adore the directors and the actors and they have all done a wonderful job in bringing Godfather out of the pages in the book.

ditto😊.Thanku Rutu for typing whatever I wanted to do so😛