I'm a movie person, if I see a book that's going to be made into a "Major Motion Picture" I'll just wait it out. Some movies don't do a book justice and people pick the movie apart and sometimes ruin it for me. I did make the mistake of reading a book once that was made into a movie, I'm still regretting that choice. So, popcorn or reading glasses? Also, do tell about movies that should have never been made from books, rant all you want, I'm listening.
[question posted by gitfiddleplayer]
responses and comments:
I love to read so i usually read the book first. I did make the mistake once of watching the movie then reading the book and having the book be awful, but i do usually prefer the book to the movie. I just finished this one book Twilight that's fixing to be made into a movie and of all the books i would like to see made into movies i would not of picked that one. Its a good book and i will see the movie when and if it comes out, but its not one i would of guessed would be made into a movie. [pheonixstar1982]
From my experience, when I read the book before watching the movie, I get disappointed with the movie. This is because I have set an expectation in my mind regarding the movie and if the movie won't be made that way then it ruins it for me. Hence, I just watch the movie now before reading the book (if I would still have time to read the book). It's true that most movies do not give the book justice because let's admit, it's hard to compress the story in a less than 2 hour film. With the books, our imagination is limitless. I have seen The Notebook (the movie) and I really liked it. However, my friends who were able to read the book before seeing the movie said that they were disappointed. But I am the only one who was not. There was a time I read the book "A Walk to Remember" and when I saw the movie, I felt that there were a lot of significant parts that the movie was not able to show. And finally, the movie that I was really disappointed with was the Da Vinci Code. The book was a phenomenon. But the movie failed to capture this phenomena. Well, Tom Hanks was a bankable star but still the movie was not that good. And wasn't everything too dark? [berryliciousme]
Hi friends... I love to watch movies, but more I like is to read books. This is the reason, I always read the book first before going to theatre. Am not saying, I have read all those books before watching movie, but if I watch a movie first and like it, moreover if I know that this movie is based on some novel, I can't wait reading. You may ask, when you've already seen the movie, you already know 'bout the story, then why you'll spend so much time reading the book? I feel differently completely here. Movies and books are two separate medias. They can not be two competitors. In case of books, it lets you some space for your inmagination, but movies are created upon the directors' view. [debjit]
i don't have patience to read a book if i know that a movie based on that book will be released soon. i'll just wait for that movie and not to buy for that book. after i graduated in college, i already lost my habit to read books. now, i just surf in the internet if i need to find someone... [melo_828]
There have been several books I've read that have turned into movies. I'm always interested to see how the book comes to life, especially Harry Potter. Sometimes I just can't quite picture what the author is seeing and when it comes across on screen, it helps me out a bit. There's one book I read after I saw the movie and that's Pretty In Pink. There's a reason why I did but I won't spoil it for others. I read The Devil Wears Prada and couldn't help but compare how different the movie was. I liked the movie but there's so much in the book that they changed or just didn't bother to use. There is one book that went from bad to worse. I read Hannibal and afterwards I just thought it was blah. Then the movie came out and it was bad. I didn't think it could be worse than the book but it was. One of my favorite books, Confessions of A Shopaholic by Sophie Kinsella, will be hitting the big screen soonish. Not sure if they're wrapped on filming or not but I know there are already some major changes and a lot of people are unhappy about them. It should be interesting to see how they pull this off. [Reesers]
I haven't seen enough of book to movie films. The ones that I do like are The Hours and Girl, Interrupted. I've also read the books and I think that for those two films they did the books justice. I saw the movie Atonement, yet I didn't read the book. And after seeing the film I wasn't interesting in finding the book, lol. The movie was kind of dry, but I think that's because it wasn't my type of film to begin with. I guess you have your hits and your misses. [Xdrowninghavocx]
I like to read so I'm more likely to read the book then see the movie. Sometimes i find i get more of whats in the movie than i would if i hadnt read the book (an example is the other Boylen girl...good movie but i understood it alot more when i watched it again after finishing the book) I have a habit of picking apart movies for leaving good bit out or changing names from the book. [saundyl]
I think movie and Books are very different. The way things are expressed in books, the language, the description, its amazing. While the expressions, the body language and the charm that can be visualized in a movie can never be expressed in words. So the two are totally different and one can not be replaced with the other one. [dropofrain]
I'm not a reading guy, so definitely I'll wait for the movies to come out. Beside, usually movie is not 100% the same with the book because limitation of time (duration of movie just about 2 hours), it is common there is some part of the book that been taken out. So many people I known who have read book before see the movies always said "the movies ruined the book", but to me who doesn't read the book will feel "oh the movie is quiet good actually". [xsquid]
I read the book first. However, it might happen that I will see the movie and latter learn it is based on a book that I have not read yet. I may go and buy the book, but not likely. I do not know of any movies that should never been made from a book. I guess that is because I did not read that book first. I have seenmovies that do not do the book justice, though. [suspenseful]
I definately prefer to read first, b/c alot of the time the movie leaves out alot of stuff out and at the same time you don't get the enjoyment of imagining and envisioning the characters,places, etc. Unfortunately this whole phenomenon of book-to-movie adaptations shows how lazy and uncreative people are becoming. [Gorcon]
I will watch the movie an then if I like it I may read the book. I like to see how close the book is to the movie. So often things are changed. Sometimes better but mostly no. My daughter really liked The Spiderwick Chronicles books. So we took her to the movie. They condensed all six books into a two hour movie. I did not really like that too much. Also The Golden Compass. I never read the books but heard of them. If I hadn't read about the books I would have been completely lost as to the whole animal being souls thing. [Ruthep]
Reading glasses of course, except that I use these glassed coz I have myopia. :) I hardly watch movies. We have no TV at home, I use the computer for work, and I hardly step out of home. So naturally, I enjoy the book more than the movie. Cheers and happy mylotting [positiveminded1977]
im not a reader.. i never have time or the attention span so i just wait it out [moonlitmagikchild]
We're probably standing in line next to each other. [gitfiddleplayer]
I prefer to read the book because its more detail. I will watch the movie as well though. [lynnchua]
I'll wait for the book to become the movie. I don't have a great imagination and I don't care how much those book worms tell me the book is much better than the movie, nothing beats digital special effects and the THX sound from a theater's walls. I don't even care anymore about the book's story after getting a brain full of lights and sound. Save the reading glasses for reading bills and put more butter on my popcorn! [mrghill]
Mr. G. Hill, you're comments are right on! [gitfiddleplayer]
I love to read the book than watch the movie. Most of what was in the movies are not really in the book. in the book you know why they did that or what he was thinking unlike in the movie that you have to guess. I do not agree that good books must be made into movies because they turned out different from what is in the book. [everlasting]
I love reading, so I always read the book first. A few times I have seen movies that have been based upon the book, And I have been really disappointed in the movie. The movie turns out nothing like the book. Reading the book is far better then watching the movie I found. [Goodie123]
Read the book, then go watch the movie. [rogue13xmen13]
Good discussion! I have done both and I must agree that reading the book first does tend to ruin a movie because they hardly ever do the book justice. Occasionally, though, it seems that the movie is even better than the book, but that's a rare occurrence. I have always been a Stephen King fan and read every book I could find of his. When his movies started popping out everywhere, I had to see them as well. His movies are usually very close to his books, so I always enjoy hearing that one of his books has been made into a movie. The Andromeda Strain is another example of a movie being as good as the book. I'm talking about the original movie, though; not the remake. The remake is almost nothing like the book, but the original movie is exactly like the book! But I do tend to agree with you. In general, seeing the movie first is a better idea because you see all of the differences and tend to focus on them rather than on the movie itself. [mentalward]
I think it depends a I once read the book ' Goodnight Mr Tom' and it was fab and then when it was made into tv version I hated it as it didn't do the book justice. However there are plenty of books that have been made into Ffilm that I've loved so it juts depends on how well a fim is made! x [frankiecesca]
I'll happily read books or watch movies,depending on what I'm in the mood for.It depends on the Media,and the source.Some complex books will take a lot longer to reach the screen (big or small) as they'd be difficult to translate to a visual Medium..that was one Difficulty with the "Lord of the Rings" Project.they had to wait for the technology to catch up! So LOTR had a more literary base when it finally got to the Cinemas. I'd once read the "Jason Bourne" Books way back,then Enjoyed the Movies as they came out,then went and bought the books as a Trilogy to compare retrospectively..not quite the same,are they?! Movies tend to be quite linear in outline,they'll take a storyline and dramatise it..A book can Keep a bunch of threads going,weaving and crossing,doubling back,so that a Movie of a complex book tends to become much more simplified,sometimes leaving you wanting more,or disappointed that something you remembered and enjoyed in the book didn't make it in the crossover!I can't think of any book to Movie projects offhand that I think shouldn't have been greenlit,but I can think of some original Movie concepts that never came from a book IMHO that shouldn't have been made! [ShepherdSpy]
Hi gitfiddleplayer, I am just the opposite I'm a book person, if I see the movie later that is fine too. I've never had a big problem with it although many people tend to put down movies after they have read the book. Blessings. [Pose123]
Yea, that's why they have book clubs and movie critics. [gitfiddleplayer]
I like to read so I usually read the book first. But since I don't really have too much time to read sometimes I end up not reading the book and not watching the movies :p Like I promised myself I would read the Harry Potter Books before watching the movie. I have not read or seen a single Harry Potter movie. :p I can't think of one particular book that shouldn't have been turned into a movie but I think one great book-to-movie title is Like Water for Chocolate. [sweethopia]
I like to read the book first if I know there is one. I always think that most of the time, the book is always better than the film, although I have to say that I liked reading the Godfather books and then watching the film. Many time if I read the book I will not watch the film because I feel that I have seen it through reading the book. [gemini_rose]
I always prefer the book. Though I admit I'm one of those people who picks the movie apart because it almost never lives up to the book. Several of Stephen King's books should never have been made into movies- or they could have been much better. One example is the Langoliers (not sure on the spelling). The movie was horrible, there was no suspense or thrill. It was pretty lame. But the book was good. One exception to the book-is-always-better rule is Apollo 13. The book (the original is titled Lost Moon) was excellent, and the movie was Amazing. It followed the actual events and did not add a bunch of stuff just for the sake of drama. Ron Howard did an excellent job with that. [Sillychick]
Ron Howard could direct anything and make it great. [gitfiddleplayer]
My son always says that the movies just dont live up to the books,I wouldnt know as im no movie watcher,but I do read if there is time to fit it all in !!but I should imagine if you have read a book and its beeb brilliant then your expectations of that movie are high,and the adrenalin flows as you take your seat to watch it,but then there is the ultimate disappointment of being let down!There is a movie that I would like to see and im not too sure what its called,but it all centered around the romantic whirlwind of Dylan Thomas and Caitlin (his wife in time) and the tempestuos love life that they had,it sounds fascinating,but maybe more a womans film!! [ruby222]
I more of a movie person then read the book later if the movie interested me. I am not much a reader. or should I say I do not take the time to read like I should. Lately I have more time on my hands and have seemed to find other things to do instead but should really sit down everyday for a bit and start a book. This would be nice. My husband loves to read and can read very fast sometimes finishing a book in a day or two. I think that is part of my problem is that i read much slower so it can take a while before I can finish. [ryzach]
I like either one or the other but most often I find that if I see the movie first, I don't like the book, and if I read the book first, I don't like the movie. Very few stories have been the exception for me. [galadr1el]
I will rather wait for the movie as i'm not a person into reading.. hehe =D PLus, i prefer visual effect then imagining it myself and somehow or other, i cant seem to make those words into a picture inside my mind, and i cant visualise it that way.. But when i'm watching the movie, it's different as everything is layed out for me and i dun need any imagination.. hehe =D Though some parts of the movie may be different form the original or from the book, but still i will prefer to watch then read.. hehe [kun2349]
I read the notebook before i saw the movie . It was such a great book and the movie put it to shame . I think you miss out with just a movie , and with the book you learn more , because they tell more [metschica25]
i am a huge book fan and i love reading! so i would definitely read the nook. for example, i haven't seen the "Da vince code" movie yet, but i have already read the book, and all the other books by Dan Brown.... [boxieblue]
I know what you meant to type. Welcome to myLot. I never read the book but I saw the movie. [gitfiddleplayer]
Oh, I kind of ride the fence on this one. I'm an avid reader. But you are right. Sometimes the movie cannot do the book justice and will change things or leave things out. And then it becomes very annoying to watch the movie. Even though I did not read any of "His Dark Materials" series I heard that "The Golden Compass" may have been better off in book form instead of movie magic. Of course, that could have been all the protests and whatnot. If I think of any other bad book to movie deals, in the words of our governor, I'll be back. LOL. [gtargirl]
Wow! I feel honored. [gtargirl]
Hello gitfiddleplayer. I must say that I prefer to read a book first, then watch the movie. That's because I don't think, in general, that a movie can tell the whole story like a book can. I do get annoyed when movies leave out certain characters that I really like, or change the ending of a story I really enjoyed. I honestly cannot recall right now a specific film that I thought didn't portray the book well, although I know that's happened. But, hey, I can recall the films of some of the John Grisham books that I thought were quite good. The Pelican Brief and The Firm were both really good films and I loved the books. So, I guess I'm answering the "opposite" question from that which you posed. Take care. [PearlGrace]
i prefer reading the book to watching the movie. because the writer have unlimited freedom to create fantastic atmosphere in that story while in movie, the art director has limited capacity and limited property to create fantastic atmosphere in the story. in addition, the readers can have free imagination in enjoying that atmospher e in reading book while by watching movie , the audience's imagination's freedom were limited by art director. in sort, reading book can improve our imagination and fantasy and watching movie can only challenge art director's creativity while the audience cant improve their own imagination and fantasy. reading book makes readers' mind active while watching movie makes audience's mind pasive. [skyTears]
reading books is better then watching movie because the writers have unlimited freedom to explore my fantasy and imagination about the atmosphere of the book while in movie the art directors have limited capacity and condition to create fantastic and imaginative atmosphere of the film.. in addition, the readers can explore their free imagination and their fantasy in enjoying that such reading but by watching movie the audience's imaginative and fantastic freedoms are limited by art directors. in sort, books can improve readers' mind while movie can only challenge art directors' creativity and the audience cant explore their their mind's freedom. books can improve readers' mind become active while movie makes audiences mind's become passive [skyTears]
Welcome to myLot. Good points. [gitfiddleplayer]
I really had rather see the movie before I read the book because if I have already read the book, then the movie is usually ruined for me. The movie just can't get down and deep into the subject like a book can. And of course they always feel that they have to make changes when they make the movie. A good example of this was the Da Vanci code. The book was so good and so exciting, but the movie left much to be desired; or it seemed so to me. There are some exceptions to this though. One of them being "Little House on the Prairie". The books were really good, but Michael Landon did a wonderful job of making the TV series even better. Then Stephen Kings book "Christine" was slaughtered when they made the movie Christine. In fact most all of his books were changed so much when they made the movie that it was hard to even recognize it. But as a rule, I guess they do a pretty good job when they make the movie from a book; but still I like to read the book afterwards. Does that make sensse? I think I'm rambleing. :o) Guess I better get back to reading my book. Nana [Nana530]
No you weren't rambling, I was popping some movie popcorn and about to watch a flick. [gitfiddleplayer]
Most of the time I can say that I wait for the movie. Now I wanted to see the Golden Compass and had the chance to get the book. The book was really good, so was the movie. That are 3 books to that story and I have read the first but not the second too. I also really like the Color Purple and I saw the movie before reading the book. The movie great, but I did enjoy the book just as much as the movie. Most of the books that I have read are have not been made into a movie. The two that I have spoken of have been movies. Oh, Bearwolf was another book that I had before I got to see the movie. But once I saw the movie I didn't read the book. I still have it too, maybe one of these days I will read the book just to see what the movie missed. [twallace]
I like doing both. I usually read the book before I go see the movie. It is fun seeing how similar and different the movie and book are. That is why i try and read the book before the movie. But, that is just me. Sometimes I do get lazy and get into my moods where I just forget about the book and just watch the movie. [tigger44]
Welcome to myLot. If I read all the books I'd never have time to see the movie. [gitfiddleplayer]
Good day...For me which ever comes first that catches my interest. If a book was written and the review was good, I'll read it first then if a movie is created afterward I'll watch it. If a movie was made and the preview was interesting, I'll watch it and when a book is written after it, I'll read it. [blackmantra_x]
Well, a lot of times there are movies that are made from books, and that sometimes can be the Bad part as I feel usually the Books are a lot better, and keep you enthused a little more. Especially when it comes to ones from like Stephen King especially. But a lot of times unless I have already read the book, I will be like a lot of people, first see the movie, and then read the book if interested and then compare the 2 if I wish from there. Yes, there can be disappointment if you have read the book first, but the cool thing is they are a lot different to help give you are share in some imagination for it as well. [KrauseHome]
I'm with you, I like to see the movie first. Then, if the movie was really good, or even when it's really bad, too, I will read the book. This is especially true if there were some confusing parts or I want to know more of the details. Or, if the movie was so good that I thought the book would enhance it. I know most people don't do it that way because they say they don't want someone else's idea of what the characters, settings, etc, look like in their head. However, I don't find that a problem for me in any way. In fact, I find that the movies do an excellent job in depicting how the characters should look. [desertdarlene]
I tend to do both. If I really liked a book I'll go see the movie version, also sometimes I'll read a book if I liked the movie a lot. Oft times, I'm sorry I saw the second version as it doesn't measure up or is vastly different from the first one that I enjoyed so much! [cripfemme]
i really do love books but have gotten to the point where i stay online so much and do so much around the house, i dont seem to read them anymore. i sometimes get books on tape or cd, which is really great. yes, the book is always better, but the movie is faster. lol'they should make a movie of White lotus by john hersey. its an old novel but seems to point to what our future could be if we let certain people take over the world. [bunnybon7]
So far none I have read and seen were but maybe half the same! It is sad, but I guess it is harder to make the book into a movie. GWTW - love the movie, but read the book and it is so different it was like it was about 2 different people! Scarlett had a child with every man she married! and a few other things! Just wasn't the same and I liked the movie better than the book cause it was more romantic and such. But the book had more events and all. "All the Rivers Run" - a book about turn of the century Australia - HBO had the mini series and that is when I first saw it. Love that movie - can't find it on DVD - it was fantastic. But then I got the book and read it and even main, major events were different in the book to the point it was hardly the same as the movie! This one was different enough that I liked them both - it was like two different stories. I don't follow movies anymore anyway, so I'll just stick with the book! [coffeebreak]
I would rather watch the movie than read the book about it if there was one for tht particular movie. I can never find enough time to sit and read a book. I find it much easier also to follow the movie by watching it. There are alot of good ones out there that will make bit hits. I really can't say anything bad about books that were made on the movie for I have never read any of them but I'm sure good.happy [Remembering1996]
Hmm.. if ever that I can get my hands on a book that was a bout to be made a movie then I would be glad to read it first before the movie cause like what other said, the story is more compelling in the book and sometimes movies doesn't give what the book's real story wants to portray. [lossforredwords]
That's interesting. I almost always choose a book over a movie whether the book was made into a film or not. I also get very disappointed when the movie doesn't do the book justice, leaves out important parts, or casts actors who don't fit the description of the characters... I get to emotionally attached to how I see something unfolding that sometimes it is painful for me to watch someone else's interpretation, especially if I don't feel it to be an accurate one (worsened when the inaccurate interpretation is praised by everyone in sight)... I am very similar about covers and remixes of my favorite artist's songs. There are only two artists I can think of off hand that I can take a cover from, and I almost always dislike remixes unless they were made by the original artist. As a dancer, I also don't like seeing my favorite music set to choreography (be it dance, ice skating, or any other kind of choreographed movement). I guess I am one of those control freak kind of people who likes to be free to imagine without being distracted by the outside influence of people who have opposing ideas. However, in spite of this mindset, there are some book-based movies I really enjoy - mostly old ones such as "To Kill a Mockingbird." "The Princess Bride" is also one I always really liked. I also like what I have seen of the Harry Potter movies (although I never really got into Harry Potter in a "fan" kind of way... I still like it though). There are probably some others, but those are a few I can name off the top of my head. Usually, however, I prefer the book assuming I have the time to read it. [skydancer]
happywell i guess i prefer reading it first..then try to see it in the big screen and find out the lacking details that sometimes they had edited just to make it cinematic..i enjoy reading a book actually...than watching movies...but since lately im into the hobby of internet browsing that reading plays the last choice for me to do during my spare time.. [vanities]
I read the book first whenever I can. I guess it's just because I enjoy reading a lot. =] [ChemicalCara]
Welcome to myLot. Reading is a good habit, keep it up. [gitfiddleplayer]
I love reading. So, normally I read the book before I watch the movie. To this day I've read every Harry Potter book, but I can't force myself to watch the movies that they've made. I did read a Walk to Remember after I watched the movie, but the movie touched my heart and so it didn't make reading the book afterward such a big deal. The same goes for the notebook only I read the book first and then watched the movie. I loved both. I read A Time to Kill before I watched the movie, I enjoyed the movie as much as I enjoyed the book. But, there are some movies that I don't think do the book justice. The Client, Runaway Jury, any movies that are based on John Grisham books besides A Time to Kill and The Rainmaker, I don't feel as if the movies are worth watching. The books are much better than the movies are. The one book that I was very upset with the movie interpretation is the DaVinci Code. I fell in love with the book, it was magnificent. The movie, not so much. I went to theaters to see it and picked it apart because there were so many discrepancies between the movie and the book. This leaves me wondering, I heard the other day that Angels and Demons which is the prequel to the Davinci Code is coming out soon. I just wonder if they'll be able to do this book justice or if it will be another disappointment. [agollihue]
Welcome to myLot. Those were great books, the Grisham ones you mentioned. I've never read a Harry Potter book, I go for the movies. If a book has "scholastic" on the cover I tend to shy away from it. [gitfiddleplayer]
I always prefer reading the book before going to the movie. Many times it happened the movie appeared to me boring while others enjoyed. But still I prefer reading the book first. [parthag]
Welcome to myLot. Books are always more descriptive, movie have to cram a lot into a few hours. [gitfiddleplayer]
hey i amnt interested in reading books as i think its just a waste of time...... so i prefer to see movie........ happy mylotting! [bose6098]
I generally prefer a book to the movie that is made from it. If the author does their job properly, you can picture what is happening. A perfect case in point is Dracula which, to me, was so well written that you could visualise the horror and suspense and, somehow, it seems to have more impact than a movie. Same with Salem's Lot. I thoroughly enjoyed the book but it lost something in translation to the movie. Sometimes in horror movies, some things are left to the imagination whereas, in the book, the scene has been described in great detail. Some of the scenes in The Tommyknockers made my skin crawl but these events were skimmed over in the movie, taking the horror of it out. On the other hand, movies are wonderful, especially when they have breathtaking scenery, such as the Antarctic landscape in 8 Below or fantastic special effects. Using Harry Potter as an example, the books were absolutely brilliant and, although the movies did leave out some things I felt were important to the story, I truly enjoyed the way the movies brought the characters to life. [Piscesmoon]
I'll take the book, I love reading more than watching. As for any books which shouldn't have been made into movies, in my view that should have been most of Stephen King's novels. So many were hacked to pieces, and only vaguely resembled the novel once they reached the screen. There have been a few exceptions though, especially more recently, with the likes of Desperation, the remake of The Shining and Salems Lot, also a remake. [muscare]
i m not much of a reader and i dont like books very much.i m a movie person.i just watch movies and i dont know unless if its writen on it that story was taken or based on that book .i thnk some movies are very good even if they are taken from books like harry potter and many more i cant remember others name but i thik some of em make real good movies. [jhonymax2cool]
I'm a book person, first and foremost! I'd never read one of those books which are written after the movie, from the screenplay. Some movies don't do any justice to the book whatsoever - Stephen King's amazing writing is mostly massacred on screen, with the exception of The Shawshank Redemption, Stand By Me and The Green Mile, which were beautifully done. Another movie which was fantastic was The Shipping News. Well worth seeing after reading the book. [guybrush]
I do not go in for all of that which means I do not keep up with the latest in books. If I have read the book and they happen to make the movie I will sometimes go see the movie. I usually am not satisfied with the movie once it comes out after I have read the book. [teapotmommommerced]
Lol, I just read an entire book, for the first time since I was a teenager. I hated it that I kept falling asleep every night without knowing how it ended. It felt like I was watching a movie for 3 weeks and still didn't know how it ended! I would much rather watch a movie than read a book. But I rarely watch movies either. So, I'm not sure if any movies I've seen had been books first or not. But I do love buttered popcorn from the movie theater!!! [momalisa65]
I read the book and wait for the movie, I'm a great reader, I can not leave a reading i began, and i think that it will be easier to me to understand the movie. [kanpela]
Hi friend, I generally love to watch the movies rather reading about a book first.I don't have a habit of reading the books.I am good listener than a reader. Have a nice day . [sudhajosyula50]
For me, books are always better than the movies. That's not to say that I don't enjoy the movie. I just enjoy the book versions more. They paint a clearer picture and are better at really giving you the details that you may not fully get from the movie. [welikemoney]
I always read the book first. I know sometimes people say they are disappointed when the movie is not as good as the book was, but for me, the book helps make the movie more substantive. What I mean is, when you read a book, you get a lot of detail that can not be conveyed through film. Thought process, emotion, complicated secondary plots, etc. are more easily detected through writing. Because of time constraints, a movie cannot fit in every detail that the book contained. So when I read the book first, I can mentally fill in the empty holes left in the film. I don't know if that makes sense to others, but that is the way I feel. Reading glasses, and then popcorn, for me. [fiona08]
Reality is movies does not really show what the book really wants to tell. I always go for books, since i like to read. Sometimes i watch movies, and sometimes i get disappointed. [adoremay]
I always read the book if I can, but that usually means disappointment when I watch the movie. They can't fit all the descriptive stuff in the book into the movie. I'm not really for watching 7 hour movies but if they wanted to REALLY make it like it is in the book, they'd have to do that. haha. [thehoodoo]
Welcome to myLot. A 7 hour movie? Better bring a sleeping bag. [gitfiddleplayer]
I rather go to the movie. I don't think i've ever read a book before the movie ever came out. I'm a movie person all the way. [elmiko]
i am reading person. i do not like to watch movies taht much. so i prefer reading the book. the originality is also there. [subha12]
I read the book Bridget Jones Diary and was actually laughing out loud in places and then saw the film, I didn't find the film so funny. I have also read PS I Love You and have not seen the film but my daughters said they cried at it so I will still see when I can. I have also read The Da Vinci Code and seen the film to me they were both equal, The Bourne Ultimatum another one the same. I would rather read the book before seeing the film though. One film I really do want to watch is Peaceful Warrior adapted from The Way of The Peaceful Warrior. I'm a both person, I like to read and see and then copmpare. Ellie :D [ellie333]
Hello my friend gitfiddleplayer Ji, I wish to confine first-hand reading the book first, then opting to see movie, as I could compare what had been added/removed to give commercial manupulation. have a great day.rasp [shalu1975]
Hello my friend gitfiddleplayer Ji, Well, in my case I am not that sincere to read the book and go for the movie. Books are ideas /atmosphere prevailing in any society and brought out by single person, whereas Movies are commercially produced to gain money, So bussiness trend can be noticed. If one wants to see real, one must read book first and watch moview and find out where has gone wrong. have a nice time. [chintoo07]
I don't have enough concentration to read a book. I'm a visual person so I need the images to keep me interested. Therefore, I wait for the movie. [leeesa]
I could go either way wiht that. I have read books before I have seen the movie. I read Twilight because everyone was talking about it, I did not see the movie when it was in theaters, I watched the movie on DVD right about the same time I was finishing the book. I am glad I read the book first, it helped me to understand the characters better. I read Night in Rodanthe, but I still have not seen the movie. Usually though I would say that I watch the movie rather than read the book, but I have read books that have attachments to movie. [ladym33]
Hokiewood is turning every book into a movie, I don't know what to see or what to read anymore. [gitfiddleplayer]
If the movie was first a book, I will always read the book first, and then I'll look for a copy of the movie, only to see if it was as accurate as a book. I would always rather read something as a book, than watch it as a movie. I like my own imagination when I read a book, and the time I can take to stop and think about it. [danishcanadian]
I always prefer to read the book first and watch the movie second, but that's because I am generally quite a big book fan and I love to read. In most cases the books I have always found to be far better than any movie made from it, because with a book you get so much more depth in my opinion. The one book which I enjoyed reading and I do not feel should have been made into a movie is 'Angels and Demons' by Dan Brown. The movie was awful. [UK_Shree]