The Book Is Always Better

book is better than movie

The book is always better than the movie.

As an avid reader, I will argue this point any time, any day.

To me, it seems as though movies over the last 7+ years are going downhill (with a few exceptions).  As studios try harder and harder to sell blockbusters, there seems to be more and more fluff being produced instead.  Fluff movies are an awful waste of time.

And you know a fluff movie when you see one. Lately, they have included romantic comedies, terribly done sequels to romantic comedies, corny action movies, equally corny sequels to action movies, and over-dramatic heart-wrenchers.

Movies are over the top nowadays.  The budgets of movies are through the roof, and when these movies flop there is little return.  Everyone is hoping for an instant hit, yet the movies aren’t reaching the desired status.

Much of the problem lies in the sequels, which is an originality issue in itself.  Sure, sequels that follow a series are expected, but when it comes to sequels of a good, original movie (such as Lion King) a sequel isn’t needed, yet they still make them.

Then we have the movies that were made from books.  Which is actually wonderful because who doesn’t want to see their favorite book on the big screen?  It’s pretty interesting to see what someone else made of it.  Maybe the characters are exactly like you pictured them.  Maybe they’re completely different.  That in itself is a fun thing to see.

Creating a movie from a book is not necessarily a bad thing.  The problem arises when the only movies that are coming to theaters are adaptations of books.  The Hunger Games, Divergent, Twilight… need I say more?  Though two of books-turned-into-movies I mentioned were actually decent movies, there’s too much of a pattern going on here.

Additionally, a problem arises when an author writes a book with the direct intention to sell it to a studio and have it made into a film.  Where did the art of novel writing go?  It seems terrible to me that literature has been turned into a Hollywood business.

A novel tells a story with great detail.  Authors use words to paint pictures.  They have to spend their words carefully, creating histories, developing characters, and telling the plot.  Movies have the advantages of using images to convey all of this.  So, when people insist that movies are better than the books, it’s unfair.

Movies have all the advantages while authors work long and hard to produce the amazing stories that they craft.  For example, the Harry Potter books are an intricately created series of seven books with amazing character development and detail.

It’s ridiculous to imply that the movies are “better” than the books in any sense of the word.

blog signature

Advertisements

8 Comments

Filed under Bookworm Life, Lifestyle Things

8 responses to “The Book Is Always Better

  1. I definitely agree that the books are usually better, even if only because I think it’s amazing how a billion different people can have a billion different interpretations of the same page of words, and can imagine it all so differently.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Sam

    Agreed. The theme and message if the book always seems more solid to me, because it goes straight from storyteller to recipient. Movies from books have too much subjective input from the creative process and the people involved in it. Plus, books are just so much more personal since they tap into the perspective of the specific reader and allows the unique personality and mind take part of the authors vision.

    One time I overheard a kid tripping out because there was a book “based on his favorite movie”. The movie? Lord of the Rings. (Face palm) it was so naive and enthusiastic that it was cute, but man. That was interesting.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. I never yet seen a movie that surpassed the book, with the exception of the Harry Potter series. The fact that the author and the person who wrote the screenplay are the same probably explains that! But, to play devil’s advocate, I have to admit I am not a cinephile. Cinema does not appeal to me much. I prefer the vision the words create for me than someone else’s. And I suspect it is the same for you. The fantasy your brain creates through the reading of a good novel is unparalleled because you are an active reader, where you cannot be an active moviegoer.

    Long life to books and their authors!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Yes, I’d much rather have my imagination have its way with the words in the book than watching it on screen. I do love the Harry Potter movies though, but because they were not able to fit every detail from the books it was understandable when there were small things missing.

      Like

  4. Well said brother 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Pingback: The Great Book-Movie Debate… | Librarian on the Loose

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s