darkSpyro

After having a heated debate with my friend over Instagram about how I think books are way better than the films 99.9% of the time and he disagrees because he never reads, just watches tv, I want to know what you lot think. Whatever you're a fan of, do you prefer the book or the film?

An example for The Hunger Games films, they missed out vital parts, like where Katniss got the Mockingjay pin from (Madge wasn't even in the films >:c)

Harry Potter: Winky isn't in any films and neither is Peeves the Poltergiest. Harry's eyes are different to his mothers', although he's supposed to have her eyes.

Too tired to list more but opinions?
(Btw I won the debate because my friend gave up when I wrote a four-paragraph essay on why he should read more and why I think books are better )

While it is true that books are way better than the movies, because I know from personal experience that one time I read the Hunger Games, I'm gonna go with movies. Why? I don't read books. I may be missing out, but eh <(^.^)>

Both, in equal parts.

whichever is the original tends to be better i guess

except eragon because the book and the movie sucked HAHA

Movies all the way.
I don't read unless I'm forced to.

Books.

I don't enjoy reading as much as I used to. So now I prefer movies even though I know that I'm not getting all of it.

Books.

Whenever I watch a movie based off a book, I end up yelling at the screen because they miss many things T.T

I personally enjoy reading, and prefer the book over the film, since the book tends to have more stuff in it that the movie cuts out due to time management.

However, I'm not a fan of first person books at all, since I feel too trapped inside that person's head and I can't properly explore the book's world. I also feel that first person books limits your ability to get to know the other characters.
So if there is a movie based on a book in first person, I find it easier to get to know the world more through the movie, since I'm not so trapped. But I will probably end up liking the book more (except if the book has bad writing. Then I can't enjoy it).

Although I usually prefer the book, there are some exceptions like The Hunger Games, since I honestly prefer the movies over the book. I just find Katniss's character in the movies better than her book counterpart, and I'm honestly not fond of the book's writing. Even the Twilight books have better writing than The Hunger Games, despite being generally terrible.

What's better.

I think that both can have their own merits, I often don't associate adaptions with the original material, and that can make everything far more enjoyable.

I don't read as much as I would like to. I don't have the time. Maybe this summer I can catch up on my reading.

But on topic, yeah, I'm sure the books are almost always better since movies have to cut out a lot of important details. But most of the time, I do enjoy the movies (maybe not as much as the books, the main example I can think of is A Series Of Unfortunate Events) too. There's not many movies based off of novels that I've watched and read both the movie and novel though...

just a reminder that adapting a book into a film is hard as nails, the director or screenwriter will always have a different vision from what the original author had. Things are always going to change

Books are definitely better most of the time. But I will say that if the people in charge actually adapted the Hunger Games perfectly and like...showed it all it probably would've been rated R.

Off-topic-ish- a lot of the time manga is better than the anime too

I prefer movies, I don't really read as much at all.

Quote: Jaggedstar

Harry Potter: Winky isn't in any films and neither is Peeves the Poltergiest. Harry's eyes are different to his mothers', although he's supposed to have her eyes.

There is a reason for that! Daniel Radcliffe was allergic to the blue contacts they wanted to put in. So he couldn't have had his mother's eyes; even if he wanted too.

films, i like books, it's just that, i can't think of the image in my head, i just read with a clear mind.

Films/TV. To be honest I'm a bit biased since I've considered going into the film industry (and still do) but I feel like it's a good way to tell a story. Of course I include TV since some adaptations have come in the form of TV shows or a TV miniseries.

Some books will always be better than the films based on it; 2001: A Space Odyssey comes to mind; but there are a good few books that have the habit of getting pretencious with their detailing and exposition, often to the point where it's wasting your time. Films can be guilty of this as well but for some reason I can better tolerate a director's artistic embellishment over an author's. Probably because a director could take 20 minutes out of the film total with it, while an author can take as many as 50+ pages (if not the entire book).

Of course keep in mind that not everything in a book will make it into a movie. A movie usually can't be longer than 3 hours, not nearly enough time to translate a 300+ page book into that format. Things will have to be cut. A TV show or miniseries has more time to include more.

Both are very different mediums for artistic expression, and it's only a matter of personal preference. Some things are better suited to one or the other, though. For example, long, drawn out conversations are better suited to books, if they hold little plot relevance and are only there for creating a sense of realism, and showing each and every thing a character does. Movie-goers generally are not going to care about this though, they want something that will be more visually stimulating.

I'd throw video games in if I was asking this question though, as I prefer them to both movies and books. I don't really prefer movies or books to one or the other though. Video games are just my main focus and what I want to do as a career, movies and books are a side thing.

Definitely books. I do like movies, but books keep my attention and I focus more on what I'm reading.

Quote: Ninpire

Books are definitely better most of the time. But I will say that if the people in charge actually adapted the Hunger Games perfectly and like...showed it all it probably would've been rated R.

Off-topic-ish- a lot of the time manga is better than the anime too

Yeah it probably would. But they actually changed stuff that didn't need changing.

Quote: parisruelz12

Quote: Jaggedstar

Harry Potter: Winky isn't in any films and neither is Peeves the Poltergiest. Harry's eyes are different to his mothers', although he's supposed to have her eyes.

There is a reason for that! Daniel Radcliffe was allergic to the blue contacts they wanted to put in. So he couldn't have had his mother's eyes; even if he wanted too.

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Quote: crystalhero37

I prefer movies, I don't really read as much at all.

- - -

Fooks.
But I'm also partial to bilms.