Books -or- Movies

[silkshadow]

ok guys heres the big question which are better the books or the movies based on the books such as harry potter and it for example.


i personally think the books are way better.

[newbsrule]

books are FAR better its not even a competition lol

[tangaloor5]

Books win hands down. They have much more detail and character development.

[archangle]

i will have to go with books b/c they have sooo much information that it make it much better than movie where they have to put everything in 1.30 hrs....some movies are just not people imagined while reading so books are much better

[1,000,000]

Movies are inferior to books.

[Spider]

in my opinion You can't really compare one and other.
Books have far more detail and storyline/plot but how long does it take you to read a good book? More than a few hours i would think...
Movies have the great aspect of how your being affected by more senses hence sound and visual.
Movies don't have the privilege of putting tons of plot and history because they just wouldn't have the audience for a 10-15 hour film.
Also it's rough comparing a movie made from a book, because it's impossible to cover all the elements in the movie and much more time consuming.
The authors and Producers and also a big factor in this debate.

I would have to say Comparing movies with books is very... Rough...
Now if you were to compare Full Seasons to books. then that could make some sense even though its still hard to cover loads of detail you can prologue You're Story by having 10-20 Episodes being an hour each.



(Please feel free to tell me if i'm going too far lol)

[nejih94]

books,a movie cuts out the good parts of a book

[Fairyboy]

Not, if the movie is not based off a book.^

But, I agree I enjoy books more.

[silkshadow]

yeah and as to how long it takes to read a book well yeah that depends somewhat on the person but i beleive it depends mostly on the book if you can really get into the book then you dont seem to notice the time it takes to read it.

[Corwin]

Well personally I find the books generally more informative than the movies, but there is something about being able to sit down and watch something, letting the action unfold in front of you, rather than having your brain working overtime to create this fantasy world in your mind, as for how long the movie is compared to the book, it depends sometimes, the first and second Harry Potter books, I can read each of those faster than I can view the related movies, although at the same time, if I really take my time on the books and soak up every last word, then I can talk half again as long to twice as long to read a book as I normally might, sometimes it just depends on what kind of mood I'm in, a good example is I love to read, all the time, but right now, I'm not feeling too much for the printed word, only thing I'm reading is manga, right now I just feel I need at least a small visual component, it comes and goes

[silkshadow]

lol corwin the visual aid is supposed to be your imagination. i personally think pics ruin the books. it deflates what you imagine the setting to be and limits your view

[newbsrule]

i agree with u silk.

and ur completly right spider

[Corwin]

that is right when you consider a normal book, but manga not being normal the pictures are intended to help w/ the experience since the author doesn't have the time or space to give explanations on scenery or actions, a certain element of imagination is necessary even for those as it's essentially split frame animation

[newbsrule]

well silk did say pics ruin books didnt say manga =P but i dont know if manga comes in a book or magazine type

[Corwin]

it comes in both, there's the magazine format like Shonen Jump which is a chapter or three of several manga's every month, or the tankoban versions which is like a small paperback book, and is put out every 2-4 months and is all one manga storyline, w/ a dozen or so chapters in it, depending on the manga and how fast you read, can take from 15min-1 1/2hrs to read one of those

[silkshadow]

no it doesnt corwin manga falls along the line of comic books well alot more involved i guess they would be a cross between books + comics but do to all the pics i d classify them as comics.

[newbsrule]

i personaly wouldnt count manga as books IMO but ya.. i agree pics do ruin detailed books such as harry potter and other novels

[Corwin]

I agree that they fall a little more in line w/ comics than regular books, but at the same time they tend to have more graphic themes then your average comic which is why a lot of them come sealed in plastic, much like the fine selection of gentleman's magazines available

[newbsrule]

lol but still i mean they dont go under same clasification as books. so i mean ya books without pics = good manga without pics = not manga?

[newbsrule]

corwin im sure ull read this so u should get on msn and join in on r convo!

[Corwin]

and just for your information, manga is actually classified as a book and/or graphic novel

[newbsrule]

well then.. -.-

[InDoc]

I hate to read, movies! hehe

[Crubion]

i have to agree with whats been said that books are generally better then the movies. but i dont read as much as i should and would rather watch a movie then read a book most of the time....

[silkshadow]

yeah its like i just watched the spiderwick chronicles and do you believe the completely change the whole thing in the book the main char was simon and his sister had disappeared but in the movie the main was simons bro and his siter was there they didnt even have the crystal spider in it .

[Corwin]

yeah, some movies are good enough that they make you want to read the book if you haven't and then some just make for horrible adaptations, at least from the point of view of those who have already read the novels

[Ariya]

Oh I love books. They tend to be much better than movies. Movies leave out the good stuff in the books.

Plus, I love the pictures painted in my mind when reading a book.

[JessikaB]

hey i agree with u..each person lives the story of a book differently but the movie is the same to everyone...::D:

[Crymson]

Books trump movies. Each person finds themes and ideas that are important to them, and that they relate to and love, but movies are such a limited cut of a book that they only catch one person's view of the book. of course, there are some that the book sucks and the movie sucks.

[Xeohelios]

Books are by far better. Especially if you turn around and watch a movie based on a book, there just isn't as much detail.

[Limabean]

I like books. I don't really get to watch television often...so I'm more personally drawn to books. XD

[sanctuary6]

Books are so much better than movies.

An example being Eragon.

Perfect book but when they gave it over to Fox for a movie, they completely messed it over.


Books own movies any day.

[Corwin]

yes that's a very good example, but once in a while it does trend the other way, it just seems to me that a lot of the ppl responding to this thread happen to be bibliophile's where if you ask the majority of america I think we'd end up w/ a vastly different response to this question

[silkshadow]

i agree some movies are better like kings "it" i found the book to be a lil to wordy but the movie covered the most inportant parts of the book. plus for some reason before seeing the movie i could never imagine an evil clown.

[Corwin]

I could, clowns are evil, I really don't like them and in fact on more than one occasion I have acted in a violent manner towards both clowns and persistent amusement park mascots, and I've learned that no matter how pushy and annoying the mascot the park's frown on that and kick you out, sometimes w/ a lifetime ban

[silkshadow]

omg lol thats a good one ive had a problem with geese attacking me at an animal park but never clowns or amusment park mascots lol

[Aikes]

Are books or movies better is the question, but to me this is a pretty broad question. Since I have spare time..... (sorry, no short film interpretation for this).

In order to honestly answer this question, you need it to first be more precise in what you want an answer to. The question should be something with more clarity or maybe the question is just too vague and asking more than one question will fill in the gaps.

Books and movies both have advantages in different situations.

Things that I feel the answer should to be based on:

#1 The mind's eye (your imagination, insight, and mental vision).
#2 Time available compared to time required.
#3 viewer vs reader interpretation (do details and original significance matter)
#4 Cost (this would be consumer cost of one vs the other)
#5 Type of movie (live actors, CGI, or animation)

I personally don't think Movies and Books are in the same class of entertainment and are compared as equals only because both convey a story. For me, it is like comparing boxing to scripted wrestling.

When you pick out a movie to watch you know in advance that the movie will be over within a set time frame and you also know that almost every movie you can watch will run for about the same amount of time.

Books.... well the amount of time you spend reading a book will be up to several factors like how many pages, how many words per page, how much you spread out your reading sessions and how long they are.

Cost for both can vary, but lets split this into two categories, ownership and the occasion for a single review. Nearly every book I have purchased has cost me far more than any movie I have bought, but this is purchase of a newly released item. If you don't mind waiting or if experiencing what has been recently advertised then a library card and the books it makes available look cheaper than movie rentals will ever be.

As for the minds eye, can anyone honestly say that a movie can be better than a book? The only advantage a movie has here is if you don't want to use your mind, then a movie is the ticket.

Viewer vs reader interpretations are also based on how well the author or director present their material. Authors do this with words, directors with visual and auditory effect. You take what the author/director gives you and your comprehension of the material will either be correct and fluid or you will simply be lost in the fog. Some people don't do well at reading. Some people may find movies too simple and shallow. Also if a movie is a converted book then you have a situation where you are trying to comprehend the interpretation a director has given you based on his or his staff's understanding of the original material.

The most important point for me is this, what kind of movie is it. With live actors and real life production you have a whole host of situational problems such as:

A) Do the actors fit the roles.

B) Will the budget supply what is needed to produce the vision of the director. (This will effect every aspect of the movie from time spent getting an actors part in a scene right to whether or not some cheap crappy CGI will be used instead of real props and special effects).

C) Is the movie a sequel. (Every movie that becomes a "hit" also becomes a point for guaranteed future income. The movie industry knows that a majority of original viewers will watch the next in the series so they don't have to invest as much to get the same result. That is why "Part 2" rarely lives up to the first.)

With CGI and with animation the visuals depend heavily on the ability and artistry of the people creating the image.

As for myself..........

Books are better when I need a vacation but don't have the time to get away.

Films (live actors) are better when I have a few hours and have no where else I want to be but have little or no more time then that.

I have to say though that anime is at the top of my list for entertainment to sit down to. I tend to spend more time watching anime series than I do reading or watching movies. I do enjoy anime movies, but I haven't found many of them that I really get into.

I suppose I made quite a bit out of a question made up of so few words. For that, I apologize.

[Thoza]

ok short post.....
better movie ( you can see effect from the story )
you more enjoy.... just listen and see it....

[SmallLady0]

I don't see the fairness in the question. Books have move freedom in the way that there is no budget for the number of pages. Only in marketing the author. Movies on the other hand if they have a good script (meaning rewrite of the novel) they can be quite good.

But to be fair it's like comparing oranges to apples. No matter how good the novel movies rarely compare because of budgets and stuff. Sometimes a company (director) can have a vision and it not come to fruition because of all the outside influences.

Think about it when your writing a paper there is no pressure from the teacher to make it marketable you don't rent the locations, or pay any actors and crew. It just you and the paper. But when it comes to movies they have to account for all of that. I just doesn't seem fair to me to compare the two.

[Awakening]

i like both but if i have to choose its books either way you have to look at it from both sides cos some ppl like books others like the movies then you have the ppl in between who like both

[1ninja1]

I've found that books which are made into movies are much more informative. The movie makers have to fit so much information into a short period of time, where the author of the book has no limits. Also the movie guys like to change things around or in some cases kill off people who don't die in the books. For instance, the woman who gets killed off in the Jason Bourne movie (part two) does not die in the book. She's still with him.

[Missing]

Book are way better , but it is nice to see it on the big screen some time even tho sometime they put there own stuff in it sum times or cut off alot of the book. but books hands down.

[epoc]

Well it Depends... but it's offen the books xD

[jujutsu]

most likely the book is better (much more details) but reading a book (without pictures) is so boring .that is way i prefer the movies

[TsukiAkari]

books are better, since in movies they always skip great things (HP 5 for example <<)

[Ryuuzaki]

Yep books all the way, I'd rather sit down with a book then watch a movie any day

[TsukiAkari]

good Neko^^ *pats his head*

[monster111]

books are much better they let you make up the scenes in your head

[grimmjow~]

movies are like my crack on a stick lol

[TsukiAkari]

you guysh are aweshome^^
never knew that so many guysh likesh reading^^

[BlueSano]

well i find books to be more informative ..
especially when they make a movie about a book ...
and sometimes the movie ruins the image in your head about the book ..it's my opinion anyway

[RetroRob70]

definatly books, altho i do wish that they would turn some of my favorite books into movies so i could see them just come to life

[DocHack]

i perfer books then movie anytime b/c the books give more details then the movie

[crittenz]

I like books better than movies. When I read a book I see an image in my head rather than the actual words and it plays out in my head like a movie. So reading doesn't bother me. When a movie comes out for a book the information and timing is usually wrong somewhere if not wrong everywhere and it frustrates me. Somestimes they kill off a perfectly good book because the movie for it wasn't good. Take The Golden Compass for example. I've read all three books in the series and loved it but the movie for it bombed out. So I usually prefere the book. It's also more informative. The movie gives you something to watch and alters your perspective so that's good but the book lets you know what people are thinking. So their both good just usually the book is better.

[tripletres]

definatly books. movies take out so much. have you seen the movie Eragon compared to the book? c'mon!

[ak49]

lol i fall a sleep reading but u can take a books outside......dam.... i still say movies