Archives
Categories:
- Business announcements
- Ask the Editors
- Best First Line Contest
- Books/Reading
- Contests
- Editing
- New Releases/Excerpts
- FAQs
- Life
- Miscellaneous
- Round Robin
- TV/Movies
- Writing
Recent Comments
- Shelley Munro (Public Displays of Affection)
- Nessa (Public Displays of Affection)
- Jaime (Public Displays of Affection)
- Delilah Devlin (A little about me...)
- Connie DeGirolamo (A little about me...)
- Delilah Devlin (A little about me...)
- Rasha (A little about me...)
- Deidre (A little about me...)
- Heather Brewer (A little about me...)
- Delilah Devlin (A little about me...)
Book Versus Movie
Through the years I have seen so many movies based on books I have read. I’m sure you have too. It is easier to follow the movie plots if you have previously read the books. Sometimes I have been disappointed in the film version. Maybe the scriptwriters made too many changes to the plot for the movie or the actors didn’t seem right to me for the characters I loved in the book. A few times though I have actually liked the films better than the books. Whenever I read a book I especially like, I share it with my adult daughters. Christina, April, Emily and I seem to go to a lot of movies together or especially now with the cold weather, we stay inside to watch DVDs.
Let’s first discuss Harry Potter. Emily has read all the books but I haven’t. She told me, “Nothing beats reading the Harry Potter books.” She didn’t like how many parts and characters were cut out in the movies, but understood since the books are so long. However, she did like seeing the Quidditch games played out on film and I did too. Watching the magical speed and action of the actors flying on the bloomsticks is more thrilling than reading about the games in the books.
Another series is the Princess Diaries. Too many things were changed in the films. For example, the father is alive in the books but not in the movies. We think the books are definitely better than the movies.
April and I love reading John Grisham’s books the best, but we feel the movies are worth viewing.
We all saw the movie and read Jennifer Weiner’s book, In Her Shoes. In the book the character Maggie is developed so much more than in the film. I loved how in the book she attended college classes when she wasn’t registered as a student, but that wasn’t in the movie. In the book there was time to show how nasty Maggie really was to her sister Rose. Also Rose being overweight is more believable in the book, but not in the film with thin Toni Collette playing Rose. But the actors’ performances are wonderful.
I never read The Devil Wears Prada by Lauren Weisberger but saw the movie. Christina said the book was much better and was very disappointed in the movie. I think Meryl Steep is great as the boss from hell. Anne Hathaway is likable as the young woman trying to survive working for the worst boss.
Okay, here is a different opinion. I liked the movie The Notebook better than the book by Nicholas Sparks. Don’t get me wrong. The book is good but I didn’t like how one part was written so for me the movie was better. And who not love James Garner as an older Noah? Another book by Sparks that we also saw on the screen is A Walk To Remember. Between the two, I liked the book better, but Emily disagrees. She said that she got to look at hottie Shane West in the movie.
What is your opinion? Do you watch the films based on books you have read? Or are you afraid you’ll be too disappointed in how the characters will be portrayed on the big screen? Do you ever read the book after seeing the movie? What about TV movies adapted from books you’ve read?
www.dianecraver.com
www.dianecraver.com/blog
The truth is, they are entirely different mediums. I love the way movies can cut from scene to scene in a second and the viewer can still follow along. That’s so much harder in a book. But books give you more time to play with the character, get inside their heads and learn what’s truly going on with them.
I love both—when they’re well done. And yet, if there is a book I adore, sometimes I won’t see the movie…I do hate to be disappointed. :) Gia
I agree. In a book you can learn a lot about the characters and read their thoughts so that is pretty cool to get inside their heads. And you’re right how in a movie you can move right along with the scene changes.
Personally I love to see a movie based on a book that I’ve read. Yes, there were a lot of parts cut from the Harry Potter movies, but that was of necessity. I’d have paid extra to see every bit of the book made into movie, but that isn’t feasible. I never read the “Princess Diaries” ... at least not yet. My daughter is 7 and we have that book on our list, but I did love the movies.
Stephen King books translate well into movies, as do Grisham’s books. What irks me is when Hollywood gets into what I consider lazy modes and does a remake of a 70s show rather than select one of the millions of originally wonderful books out there …. Grrrr … don’t get me started.
You made a good point, Liz, about Hollywood remaking a 70s show and not bothering to do a new movie when there are so many great books.
I fervently avoid movies made from books I liked, with two exceptions…
Pride and Prejudice -A&E Version, and
Sense and Sensibility -Emma Thompson’s adaptation.
Both were extremely well done, imo. Otherwise, I steer clear. I’m still recovering from the movie version of Grisham’s The Rainmaker, you know.
Great books – I haven’t seen the movies of Pride & Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility, I’ll have to get them. Thanks!
Oooo, I forgot about the BBC (A&E) version of Pride and Prejudice. You’re right … they did a fabulous job with that one. The more recent Hollywood version? Not so good.
The Hollywood version was a big disappointment.
Oooh, I LOVED the A&E/BBC version of Pride and Prejudice. It’s amazingly faithful to the book, and who can complain about six hours of Colin Firth? Sigh…
Haven’t seen the new version yet, but I can’t imagine it would live up to the Firth version.
Great topic, Diane!
I have to get this one with Colin Firth. I can’t believe I missed this version. Thanks Kate!
It’s always interesting to see what a film-maker will do with a book.
Because they are different mediums you really can’t compare them. I think that the film will always come up short of the book. In a book, there is more time to let the story unfold. A movie director has a finite amont of time and can’t portray the entire book.
That said, I’ve loved some films of books I’ve read and disliked others. It’s always a crapshoot. Sometimes I think it’s better to see the movie before you’ve read the book. Less chance of being disappointed.
That is true about reading the book after watching the movie unless it’s a mystery. LOL I don’t want to read Angel Falls after seeing the movie.