- This topic has 120 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 17 years, 10 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
dragonessjade wrote:
Why do so many people read the book and then watch the movie? I would think that it would ruin the movie because a lot of times ppl say things are left out.
I couldn’t help reading the book first. The book came out several years ago. 😆
I don’t bother reading either unless I can’t sleep. I have only finished a couple of them because I get bored with them really easy.
dragonessjade wrote:Why do so many people read the book and then watch the movie? I would think that it would ruin the movie because a lot of times ppl say things are left out.
Of course the book is always better than the movie, and I’ve found that you can follow the movie better when you know the original story. Plus, reading the book first allows you to use your own imagination to visualize the creatures and people. With a movie it’s premade. Personally, I prefer to take other people’s opinions after I’ve made my own. 😉
starbreeze wrote:I think it was well done from a technical standpoint and, to be honest, I liked the dragon. But, having read the book, the story felt too rushed to me; too much was left out. However, they probably did the best they could with the budget and movie time alloted.
Technically it was pretty top of the line. I just found Saphira very boring. The Nazgûl – here I go comparing masters with beginners again – were much more interesting.
skigod377 wrote:See? Thats why I dont bother reading! They will make a movie out of any book worth reading! 😆
Oh that’s why you’re stuck turning pages on those romance novels…
dragonessjade wrote:Why do so many people read the book and then watch the movie? I would think that it would ruin the movie because a lot of times ppl say things are left out.
I never thought the book would ever get made into a movie :X
Greater Basilisk wrote:Of course the book is always better than the movie
I’d have to disagree… there are a couple of notable cases I can think of where the movie was better.
The Green Mile (film) has a better ending than the book – less depressing. And knowing how sad the ending of the film is… that’s saying something.
I personally think Eragon (the film) is better than the book… because I’m STILL trying to drag myself through the book. Yes, the film missed out a lot. Darn good thing, too.
Forrest Gump (film) was better than the book; that said, I wish they hadn’t misquoted the “box of chocolates” line. The original quote was:
Quote:Life ain’t a box of chocolates.
Gump’s momma was a pessimist.
The dramatic timing in Harry Potter 1 and 2 (films) was better than in the books – as though she’d gone back and thought “yes, this scene works better if we put it HERE instead” – particularly the scene where Harry defeats Riddle’s spirit in #2.
But on the other hand… I’m not sure I’m looking forward to Wee Free Men.
Ha! Ha! This is another case where we’ll all have to agree to disagree. I love discussing this kinda stuff with everyone. It’s great to hear all the different opinions and the reasons for them. 😆
Ssthisto wrote:But on the other hand… I’m not sure I’m looking forward to Wee Free Men.
Wait wait, Wee Free Men is being made into a movie? I love that book! I like The Amazing Maurice better, but Pratchett is still my all time favorite author.
Ssthisto wrote:I personally think Eragon (the film) is better than the book… because I’m STILL trying to drag myself through the book. Yes, the film missed out a lot. Darn good thing, too.
I’m tempted to agree with you on that one, actually. I haven’t read any of the other books, so I don’t know about those. As for Harry Potter, I’ve only watched the movies for the animals. I don’t find the story all that interesting.
starbreeze wrote:dragonessjade wrote:Why do so many people read the book and then watch the movie? I would think that it would ruin the movie because a lot of times ppl say things are left out.
I couldn’t help reading the book first. The book came out several years ago. 😆
Yep me too, I already have eldest read before the movie was out.
Ssthisto wrote:Greater Basilisk wrote:Of course the book is always better than the movie
I’d have to disagree… there are a couple of notable cases I can think of where the movie was better.
The Green Mile (film) has a better ending than the book – less depressing. And knowing how sad the ending of the film is… that’s saying something.
I personally think Eragon (the film) is better than the book… because I’m STILL trying to drag myself through the book. Yes, the film missed out a lot. Darn good thing, too.
Forrest Gump (film) was better than the book; that said, I wish they hadn’t misquoted the “box of chocolates” line. The original quote was:
Quote:Life ain’t a box of chocolates.
Gump’s momma was a pessimist.
The dramatic timing in Harry Potter 1 and 2 (films) was better than in the books – as though she’d gone back and thought “yes, this scene works better if we put it HERE instead” – particularly the scene where Harry defeats Riddle’s spirit in #2.
But on the other hand… I’m not sure I’m looking forward to Wee Free Men.
Forrest Gump the movie was definately better than the book. The book was kind of mean spirited if you ask me and didn’t have nearly the same feel as the movie.
I always love the stephen king book sooo much better the movies generally pee me off. I hate it when someone lives that isnt supposed to like Tad in Cujo he isnt supposed to live. They always change his stuff to make it happier, damnit that is what makes it shephen king people die.
Ssthisto wrote:The Green Mile (film) has a better ending than the book – less depressing. And knowing how sad the ending of the film is… that’s saying something.
Seriously?? 😯 Oh geez.
Though some purist would behead me for saying so, I must admit I enjoyed the Lord of the Rings movies more than the books. ._. I think the movies really captured the essenece of what everyone was going through, while the books looked at it from more of a historical textbook standpoint.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
