Do movies ruin books or do they relay a version of the author's world to a different demographic?
In general, I like to read a book first and then see if the movie brings it to life in a manner similar to what I envisioned. I also think that even if the movie is well done and is fairly consistent with the book, reading the book first gives me more background information for the characters and the locale.
Gone With the Wind, is an example where both the book and the movie were great and each complemented the other.
A more contemporary book I liked in both book and movie format was "The Notebook" by Nicholas Sparks.
I'm sure many will say they just go to the movies and never bother reading the books, which is also okay as a really successful movie generally comes from a great story which can be successfully portrayed onscreen.
A film is simply an interpretation of the book translated into another medium. You can read a book in many different ways, and thus it's more susceptible to pleasing the reader. A film is what it is, and can't change.
Because the film industry is at its core a business and not an art, much consideration and respect for the original product is thrown out the window if it means gaining gross.
In the end, a movie adaptation will get your book more publicity, and almost definately get you MUCH more money than the book would on its own--the KIND of reception however, depends on the final product.
That is very well stated! I think movies can " relay a version of the author's world to a different demographic," perhaps even an aspect of the story even the author was not consciously aware of -- an aspect that was merely latent as opposed to consciously developed.
On the other hand, very often adaptations of novels to film is done poorly, such as the lame Sci-Fi adaptation of the brilliant Dean Koontz novel (starring Stephen Baldwin), for example. If one was made aware, before hand, that the film was based on a book, this movie would have "ruined" the book for her. In other words, the temptation would have been to think that the book was substandard as well.
I happen to believe that NOT all novels CAN be successfully translated into film artistically. Some novels should remain as they are; the structure of the story itself, in my opinion, sometimes will not permit the successful transmutation of the book into film.
I think that movies CAN ruin the book. I agree that does appeal to a different demographic as you are being able to tell your story to those who don't or won't read.
But at the same time, When I read a book my imagination creates all the images from the author's words. After watching the movie, if I go back and read the book, all I see is the movie.
I never watch a movie based on a book unless I've read it, especially if it is a mystery or nonfiction book. Of course, this relies on my ability to actually obtain the book. That's not always possible. Regardless of whether you do read it first, you have to remember that even when a director wants to be faithful to a book, there is a limited time frame if he or she wants there to be an audience. as a result, books like Crime and Punishment, will have sections missing from it.
I have never seen a movie that did the book justice. I feel that movies are just books for the lazier populace. If I spend the time and energy to read the story, my experience is better than someone who sees the movie; as it should be. A movie is like the cliff notes for a novel for the kids who don't want to study.
Most movies seek to make a book as profitable as possible, which usually means simplifying and changing a lot of things. So in most cases yes, movies ruin books, unless the author of the work is heavily involved.
by Catherine Spinola 5 years ago
Would you rather read the book, see the movie, or do both? And which would you do first?With so many books made into movies, it seems that people either read the book or go see the movie. Some also do both. I would prefer to read the book first and then see the movie.
by wytegarillaz 5 months ago
Would you rather read a good book or watch a movie ?If so why ? I personally love to read a book as there are no adverts !
by tomsum 7 years ago
Do you think books are always better then the movies that come after them?A lot of the big name movies use IP's from already written books. Which is better? For me personally, I think the Harry Potter books are better, but I enjoy the Lord of the Rings movies more then the books.
by Daisy Mariposa 5 years ago
What book—or book series—have you stopped reading…and why?
by disneybooknerd 4 years ago
So many great books have been turned into movies. My question is, what do you prefer, reading the bo
by Holle Abee 8 years ago
When you read a novel and later watch a movie based on the book, the book is almost always better, in my opinion. Can you think of a case when the movie was actually better than the book? I can: The Horse Whisperer. How 'bout you?
|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|