Watching a movie is better then reading its story in books?

Lebanon
March 21, 2008 8:58pm CST
What do you think if one day story books are being completly substituted by their respective movies? Do you think they will still have the same meaning?or education impact? Mark
1 person likes this
10 responses
@azahari33 (221)
• Malaysia
22 Mar 08
If given a choice, I would still prefer reading the book. Example, the Tolkien's Lord of The Rings was way much better when it was a book. No doubt the movie ws quite good, but I think there was a lot of missing parts in the movie. The same goes for Ludlum's Bourne series which I read a long time ago. The books were much better.
@DFrodeo06 (1325)
• United States
22 Mar 08
depends i saw the da vinci code and thought it was ok but wouldn't have read the book. movies like a walk to remeber the devil wears parada, the notebook, ect i read the books before they were put to movies and then watched the movies and liked the book better. all though the notebook i liked the movie better.
@annieroos (1846)
• United States
22 Mar 08
Well I am not a reader well i like to read but i don't really have time to just sit and read.. I wish i did...then when i do read i have to much on my mind to keep my mind on the story.. But people have said that the book is always better then the movies... cause in the book there is alot that you don't see in the movies.. they leave alot out to make it fit into the time limit.. and to make it interesting to the public.. YOu know come to think of it.. i read interview with a vampire.. and i saw the movie. and the book was better.. But i love the movie to.. so guess i like them both.. :D
• Canada
22 Mar 08
I dont think anything can replace the educational value of books. Sure it may not take as long to watch a movie but you take so much more from reading a book. More often than not the director takes so many liberties with the story it takes away from what the author was trying to say. An example that comes to mind right off the top of my head is Beowulf. I think anyone who has read this can really identify with the lore and the values of the anglo saxon society. It was a strugle between all that was good and all that was evil. The movie lost alot of those values and could hardly be considered an educational experience. I really hope movies never replace book.
@May2008 (179)
• China
22 Mar 08
Each coin has two sides. Both of the two ways to enjoy the story have their respective advantages. If I just want to know the story itself, I will choose to watch a movie or TV serial. If I want to get more, such as the writer's writing style, playwords of language, etc. I will choose to read a book for the movie can not offer me the information I want.
• India
22 Mar 08
it depends on how the script-writer and director handle the situation. several movies have not lived upto the expectation of the books from which they have been adapted. one such striking example is the da Vinci code. the book was the only reason why the film didnt bomb at the box office. Harry potter movies are giving justice to the book counterparts. the best movie adaptation i liked was the Lord of the rings trilogy. the book was really too imaginative and fantasical, but the movie was too good and the editors and the scripting and the direction was top draw. surely making a movie out of a book is not easy as most adaptations are usually from bestsellers. so it is always awaited with lots of expectations and the crew behind the scenes will have to be very competitive and talented to transform those words into frames.
• United States
22 Mar 08
For me, movies would never be a substitue to books. I love reading. I love movies, too. I never worry if the movie is going to be like the book. To me, they are just different entities. I can enjoy both. There is no substituting one for the other, though. I never read books printed after a movie, though. I just find that silly.
@coffeebreak (17820)
• United States
22 Mar 08
From what I have seen/read, it is almost like they are differnet - same people, different story. Gone with the Wind book and movie are so different you don't even hardly realize they are supposed to be the same - In the book Scarlet had a child be each of her husbands (wasnt't there 3 of them?)total of 3 or 4 kids. The moive had one. North and South - John Jakes book had Ory loosing his arm, the movie he just limped. All the Rivers Run - again, they had several kids in the book and Brenton was not nearly as nice to Philidelphia as in the movie and lots of other descrepencies. And I hear this from lot of people that read/watch the same title. But whatever, you just get to have fun twice without getting bored!
@filmbuff (2909)
• United States
22 Mar 08
Reading books in general are way better! You get so much more detail and you get to be inside the characters head. While watching a movie you lose so much of that. Always watch a movie before reading the book, or you will be dissapointed with the movie when you do see it. The only movie I've ever seen (and I've seen a lot) that I liked better than the books was the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. The visuals, and storytelling were fantastic, it felt deeper than the books.
@williamjisir (22903)
• China
22 Mar 08
Hello dear miksoft. To those who have no time reading its stories, watching a movie is better and vice versa. I love to watch movies instead of reading its stories in books because it takes an hour or a half or more to know the main part of the stories in the book although some of the ocntents in the books might be modified based on the art and plot...