|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2009 8:06 pm
Which do you guys think is better, books or movies, and some examples of what you think was better.
For example:
War and Peace the book is vastly superior to the movie.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2009 9:20 pm
I would have to say that the books are always better. When they make a movie out of the book,they have to change certain events and they also leave out some of the books best parts.
Example/SPOILER
Like in My Sister's Keeper. The movie was incredibly different to the book. Kate wasn't supposed to have smex with the other dude during the hospital dance. Besides that they even left out a character that was vital to the plot line. The idiots also changed the ending. >.<
....Sorry for my rant. <.<
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:32 pm
I know right? How hard would it be for people to stay more honest to the book it is based off of? Gosh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 02, 2010 9:00 pm
I completely agree with you both...even if i haven't read or seen the movie "My Sister's Keeper". ^,..^
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting Conversationalist
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 11:36 am
Yeah well it is not just with one book or movie,it's with all of them. So pretty much it is all blah.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 3:28 pm
Yes, it is all blah. And the authors let them do it which is even more angering!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:11 pm
Actually,most authors don't really have any control over the film based on their book.They are only asked if their book can be produced into a movie,and rarely the author is asked for their opinion on anything. the author of The Outsiders was one of the lucky few to have been asked anything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 4:40 pm
I was referring to the fact that in documentaries an such, the authors say they liked the movie when it was awful
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 5:06 pm
You mean awful in the sense that is was nowhere near the book? Or that the directors filming skills are lacking?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 7:39 am
Both.
Angels and Demons. Read the book. Don't watch the movie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 7:01 pm
Watched the movie. The movie bored me. So pretty much this is pretty late. :/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Jan 05, 2010 8:59 pm
pretty late? more like extremely late. i wish i never had the movie, but sadly i do. I'll just try to find myself the book and buy it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting Conversationalist
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2010 9:16 pm
Lucifer_dragonbane pretty late? more like extremely late. i wish i never had the movie, but sadly i do. I'll just try to find myself the book and buy it. Of course. Because I own it too. >w< I didn't want to see it because I knew it was going to be very boring and long for my taste.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2010 2:41 pm
Well depends on it, I tend to like movies more than books because it's the best medium for the lazy man but when comparing books with the movies based on them in general the experience you have with the book is far superior to the movie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2010 10:14 pm
Is that Bayblade Anais????
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
