Movies VS Books
I watched a couple of clasic movies yesterday, they were on TMC and I had never seen them before. They were Sunset Boulevard and To Kill a Mockingbird. Sunset Boulevard was on first, I couldn't believe how risque it was for the times. They didnt show anything but it sure was implied. When it went off I got up and started to do some stuff around the house. The Candian was listening the the TV while he worked on the cabinets in the kitchen and he told me that to Kill a Mockingbird was coming on and I should watch it. I wasnt interested but he had read the book in school and was raving about how good it was. Hubby is not a book reader at all so I watched it. It was awesome and moving and just a wonderful movie. When it was over I went online to to order a copy of the book. He asked me "Why would you want to read the book when you just saw the movie?" OH OH OH ...he doesnt get it. To me any great book is so much better than the movie..they cant tell the whole story in a movie. Books are precious and irreplaceable to me. I know why I never read this in school. I grew up in the 60's and and was right in the middle of desegration in a southern State. I was bused to an intercity school until my parents moved to sububia. Even in suburbia, i think the teachers didnt want to start anything by having that book on the reading list. I could be wrong but thats my thoughts. Anyway now I cant wait to read the book, I have been reading everything online about Harper Lee I can find. And I think that little girl should have won the oscar...not Patti Duke! But I am curious as to how others feel...books or movies bloggers? Which is better?
Later
posted by Mel at 1:35 PM
7 Comments:
Books hands down !!!!!
Books, every single time. Watching the Lord of the Rings trilogy was great, but I had read the series so often that I knew every bit they skipped, when dialogue was spoken in a different setting than in the book, and-the worst thing ever—when they digressed from the story. Tolkein had so much packed in to the trilogy, why did they have to add their own content to it? Just to give Liv Tyler more screen time? Bah! You don't mess with the classics for a pretty face!
I never see a film based on a book without thinking the book was better.
I have to say...BOOKS!!!
There have been less than 2 occasions where I found the movie was better, but I've read thousands of books, so the odds are with the written venue, definately.
Though "To Kill..." was a very well done movie, indeed.
for the most part i would say books..before movies..although..it is tight with mockingbird..both are great..as well as with fight club. :)
Oh, Books!
Books books books books.
But I have to read them BEFORE I see the movie.
And when you read the book you conjure up your own images, and then you see the movie, and it's never right. You imagined that conversation more subdued, they cast the wrong person for that part, et cetera.
Oh, definately books. The only time I thought a movie was better than the book was with The Bourne Identity. I didn't like how weak the female character was in the book.
In general it annoys me when they skip parts of the book I think is important, and when they change names. Even worse, they take the names and the title but the rest is completely different.
I will admit I sometimes have trouble getting through the books, Lord of the Rings comes to mind, and then I find the movie to be enjoyable just so I know a little of what is going on.
Definitely books. I'm a librarian's daughter---its in my blood.
But if they DO make a movie of a book I like I'll watch it with enjoyment too, even if it doesn't live up to the book. Because it's rare that they do. They're a whole different sort of media so I forgive the changes if the movie is entertaining and well-acted.
Not like my frined blackcrag there---you should HEAR him go on about what they did to The Lord of the Rings! Yikes.
Post a Comment
<< Home