[carinacan]

well everyone does it.....but i think if you are going to watch the movie DON'T read the book...
you'll be realy let down
like i loved the book Percy Jackson....the movie was ok but it was like thay opened the book read 1 page and baced the movie off what thay read.
the whole movie is on them findeing the perals but in the book the perals are givin to Percy by his dad.

anyway i think thay need to do better if thay keep making movies out of books.......u?

[Colours94]

yeh im usually really annoyed at movies based on books cause they end up making stuff up and changing things.
But thats a movie i guess... if they'd follow the book exactly it would be to long and not everything works on the big screen that does in a book

[bridgie]

I'd much rather read the book. my imagination is quite vivid so i can see pictures in my head as i read them. the characters usually never match up to the people cast in the roles in the films. I think I would rather not watch the movie instead of not read the book. just me anyway. but I love books. holding them reading them flipping through the pages, new book smells. the whole thing love it so i guess what i am saying is i agree. they do need to start doing a better job if they continue to turn books into movies.

[Maven]

I agree books are usually better than movies. Movies have to be made to fit an allotted time and may not have the budget to make the movie as well as it would need to be to compare to the book.

If a movie is made of a book I want to see, I usually prefer to read the book first; it seems, if I see the movie first, I lose interest in reading the book, even though I know most likely, a lot was changed.

[lonegael]

The funny thing is, I remember one movie from a book that was actually better than the book. The movie was Gorky Park. Because the book was a bit incoherent and the person who wrote it was bit unspecific about a LOT of things, they simply had to cut a lot of nonsense out in order to make the movie make sense. And, viola! a good movie from a nyaa book. Amazing! The smae in reverse, aragon. Good book, Hideous movie, AAKKKKK! How could you go worse! Ah well.

[Timgt5]

Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. I agree that in general the book is an ultimatlely deeper experiance, simply because you can pack so much more into a novel than a two hour movie.

The Lord of The Rings Trilogy was well made. Peter Jackson had a stellar cast, and a great eye for detail. The side benefit is that they got a lot of people reading LOTR books afterwards.

Harry Potter, also well done, since JK Rowling herself is heavily involved in each one. All of them have been directed, written and produced well. The "kids" (now young adults) are all talented actors and I could not think of anyone playing Harry Potter but Mr. Radcliffe, who I believe will have a very bright future as actor.

anything based on Stephen King has been rather disappointing. I never bother with any of the films made from his books, the books are far better. I cringe when I hear that JJ Abrams was trying to do a film of the Dark Tower epic... Don't do it.

Dune, despite having a great cast, and being based on a massive epic, was dismally produced and the subsequent sci fi series a couple of years ago was not much better.

[Fresia]

I just don't expect the movie to be like the book anymore and then am not let down. I go in expecting a different twist on the story as it usually is and then tend to enjoy it. I used to be so disappointed when they weren't the same but they can never match our imaginations of the written print or someone's interpretation from the print. I actually now appreciate it that it is not the same exact thing that I read; it is something different, not so predictable. Occasionally it is kept true to the story and is done well, such as in the case of the Potter series; I can appreciate this as well and very much enjoyed it. This is so rare and difficult to do as everyone has their own ideas and imagination when they read something. Too many people involved in the creative process of making a movie.

Expecting something different, you might be pleasantly surprised by someone else's take on it and opened up to slightly different characters and story, not the same thing instead of being disappointed that they aren't the same. Chances are they won't be.

[carinacan]

Originally Posted by lonegael

The funny thing is, I remember one movie from a book that was actually better than the book. The movie was Gorky Park. Because the book was a bit incoherent and the person who wrote it was bit unspecific about a LOT of things, they simply had to cut a lot of nonsense out in order to make the movie make sense. And, viola! a good movie from a nyaa book. Amazing! The smae in reverse, aragon. Good book, Hideous movie, AAKKKKK! How could you go worse! Ah well.

you are sooooo right.....eargon the book was way better......good idia for thed! eargon fans!!! i just can't wait for the next book!

[carinacan]

Originally Posted by bridgie

I'd much rather read the book. my imagination is quite vivid so i can see pictures in my head as i read them. the characters usually never match up to the people cast in the roles in the films. I think I would rather not watch the movie instead of not read the book. just me anyway. but I love books. holding them reading them flipping through the pages, new book smells. the whole thing love it so i guess what i am saying is i agree. they do need to start doing a better job if they continue to turn books into movies.

yaaayyy! i thought i was the only one who did that . i try to tell my son to see the book in his minde but he just looks at me as if i'm nuts( hummmm......lol) .... but i know what u mean i don't just read i watch it whial i'm read.... i can see what's going on and here what thay say...does that make since? books are like whole other worlds that you can open and join!

[Perna]

Some stories I like both the book and the movie and watch/read both a couple times and get them mixed up (so when I'm reading I see movie scenes/characters) which can help in some situations (I like Harry Potter and LOTR characters). "Ordinary People" is one movie/book combination I like. Another is "Captain Newman, M.D." with Gregory Peck, based on the book by Leo Rosten, about an Army psychiatrist during the WWII.

[Princess_Obsidian]

Greetings,

If an author wants his/her book/s to be turned into movies, then that is his/her business. I actually found it quite amusing that Stephen King would appear in certain movies of his books.

Have a good one.

[BugsyMalone]

I always feel sorry for directors/actors who are maybe big big fans of a particular book, and really want to make it into a movie but find that they have to compromise for costs, studio expectations, audience feedback etc. It must be hard to make movies - we treat it like a very personal creation like art and novels (we award Oscars for best director, best actor...) but actually it must be very much a team effort - ever seen how many people are listed in movie credits? Or how many production companies are namechecked at the start? An 'ABC' film made by 'XYZ' in association with '123 productions'... imagine having to explain your vision to so many hard-to-impress Hollywood executives!

Perna - I'll have to check that out, I've read some of Leo Rosten's non-fiction, it was excellent, I didn't know he wrote fiction too. Thanks!