Books2Movies Club discussion

As a new mod here now I thought I'd drop in with a bit of an interesting friendly post. Much as I love books I also love films and have a group on Facebook where I discuss many of them.

My topic here however is about books and film pairings and the order in which to view them. In recent years I have made a point of reading the book first where I can. I am going to do so with 12 Years a Slave for instance. However sometimes I cannot help but see the film first - when I did not realise there was a book for instance.

What are your opinions? Do you stick strictly to watching a film first or reading a book first? If so why? Or do you not care...?

I like to read the book first as a general rule because the story can be given more depth through writing. The film is limited to 2 hours and can lose some of the author's original message or intention.

Sometimes I will see the movie without knowing there is a book - like you mentioned. I did this with "Silver Linings Playbook" and loved the movie. I didn't have a preconceived idea of what the characters were going to be like. That can be disappointing when the cast isn't as you might have pictured...especially with a book that you love.

Two movies that I consider to be as good as the books (and, that is rare for me) are "To Kill a Mockingbird" and "Snow Falling on the Cedars." Both had great screen plays and casting. "Life of Pi" was the best use of 3D for a movie that I have ever seen - really beautifully filmed rendition of this book.

Teresa - interesting; I generally like to see the movie first, but for similar reasons. I prefer to go into a movie fresh, without preconceived notions - and no spoilers! The movie is an event for me, and I love seeing the story told on the screen. And the less I know about it, the better I tend to like it. I love being surprised.

But the book is usually different enough, that I will read it second, and it will have so much more depth that I can fully enjoy it, too.

Of course, lately, I've read so many books first, because the movie hadn't been made, so it's not a hard and fast rule for me.

It used to be that I only watched movies after having read the books, but I found that I enjoyed the movies far less when I did that. I couldn't remain unbiased or objective. So, my new practice is to watch movies first, and then read the books.

Hmm see my answer depends entirely on the film itself. Sometimes if the subject matter of the book is very heavy I usually tend to just watch the movie first, sometimes I like reading the book first and start comparing what parts Hollywood has fibbed or misrepresented. Then it becomes kind of a game!

The only books I've read that has a movie is The Lovely Bones (whose movie I didn't really like much) and The Hunger Games. Though I feel Hunger Games movie was spot on (and, dare I say, even better than the book), Catching Fire was disappointing because I feel the movie left out tons of important things. So my book-first-then-movie plan may end up being abandoned, but it's nearly impossible to anticipate what movies will be made into shows or movies.

But ultimately, it depends on if I think I'd be interested in the book or not (if I haven't read it already). Vampire Academy, for instance, I have no interest of reading the series any time soon. But as soon as the movie is out on dvd, I'll be renting it!

I'll watch a movie even if I dislike the book, but I will not read a book if I dislike the movie.

I don't mind going from movie to book. Sometimes I'm inspired to do so because I enjoyed the story so much. Plus I have a mental picture of characters and scenery.

Book to movie can be tricky. Movies leave out parts of stories, cast actors that don't fit my perception of the characters, etc. I tend to be very judgmental instead of just enjoying the film.

a book loses its magic if i see the film version first,nothing can change this, i didnt read even the Da Vinci Code just because i have seen the film, so i can watch the film only after i read the book

Jonathan wrote: "As a new mod here now I thought I'd drop in with a bit of an interesting friendly post. Much as I love books I also love films and have a group on Facebook where I discuss many of them.

My topic h..."

I'm like you, it happens the exact same thing to me.

And most of times the movie comes out I watch it and I know that I have the book, and then I don't even see the book because I already watched the movie. ut there are some rare case scenario when I watch a movie and then read the book later on.

Greetings bibliophiles :)

For the most part, if the story grabs my attention enough that I can't wait for the film to be released, I'll go ahead and read the book. However, the rest of my family likes to watch the film without spoilers. They HATE the fact that I already know what's going to happen, and I HATE not being able to talk to them as soon as I'm doing reading the book! After they watch the film then read the book, it becomes a game for us to spot all the differences!

Eve wrote: "For the most part, if the story grabs my attention enough that I can't wait for the film to be released, I'll go ahead and read the book. However, the rest of my family likes to watch the film without spoilers..."

That's exactly why I do it! I like to see the film without spoilers. But the book is different enough from the movie, that I can usually enjoy it, even after I've seen the movie. (And I don't think I've ever heard anyone complain that the book wasn't as good because the it did things different from the movie. :) )

It seems I am in the minority here. Without fail for me, the book is always better. The story is what I enjoy.

For movies that are not based on books, the story is what will win me over. Pixar is very successful at developing great stories for example. Other animation studios can release films that are beautifully rendered, but the storyline fails miserably.

When a film studio takes "creative license" with a book's plot, the story can be ruined. ("A Prayer for Owen Meany" was unrecognizable as a movie). If I were an author, I would be extremely cautious about signing over my book's rights as a film development.

Teresa wrote: "It seems I am in the minority here. Without fail for me, the book is always better. The story is what I enjoy."

I tend to agree, Teresa. But that's part of why I like to watch the movie first. That way I'm less likely to have preconceived notions of what the characters are like; and I'm not likely to be sad that the movie left out so many good parts of the book :)

I always trybtobread the book first because if I see the movie first I can't really get into the book.

haha, *try to read*

Breesc23 wrote: "The only books I've read that has a movie is The Lovely Bones (whose movie I didn't really like much) and The Hunger Games. Though I feel Hunger Games movie was spot on (and, dare I say, even bette..."
I disagree with you on the point of The Hunger Games versus Catching Fire. First off, I liked both, and reading them, I liked Catching Fire even more than The Hunger Games. Having watched both movies, I feel that Catching Fire was the better adaptation, with The Hunger Games leaving out more characters I felt were important.

For me, I try to always read the book first! However, some movies have changed the book so much I wish I would have almost seen the movie first, or in some cases was glad I saw the movie without knowing there was a book!

The big example of this for me was Ella Enchanted. I loves this movie in high school and college, but then found out it was a book. I was glad I did not read it before, however. It was almost like the people who wrote the book read ONLY the back cover before they made the movie. So, I was glad I could like the movie for what it was, and then find the book later and like it for the completely different story that it told!

Teresa wrote: "It seems I am in the minority here. Without fail for me, the book is always better. The story is what I enjoy.

For movies that are not based on books, the story is what will win me over. Pixar..."

I agree that the book is always better! Although, I did just read Pitch Perfect...and in that one case the movie was better since the book was boring and not at all what I thought it was going to be! However, that is the only one I can think of where the book was not better....

Books give you so much more and give the fully story! I don't understand how some people can even watch certain movies without having read the book!! I just recently saw Enders Game, and had I not read the book I don't know that I would have liked the movie much at all... Knowing the back story in movies that like help to make it worth watching, and help viewers to get into it and really feel for the story line!

(I actually have a group on goodreads called "The Book Was Better." You should check it out: https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/...)

I have to agree with @Breesc23. I think the Hunger Games movie was better than the book for one main reason: Katniss was WAY more manipulative in the book and the film cut out a lot of the fake sappy love scenes.*barf* Making the heroine less douchy made it easier for me to root for her. On the other hand, I LOVE the book Catching Fire way more than the movie. The film felt so rushed because it left out so many important details from the book and that eye-opening shot at the end is so clichéd. If I'm not , the Ender's Game movie used the same exact ending shot (which bugged the heck outta me coz he's supposedly in stasis during his light speed journey). I agree with @Dana -- I don't think I would've enjoyed the movie if I wasn't a fan of the book series. Hopefully, they make sequels that actually delve into the different back stories, i.e., the Demosthenes/Locke demagoguery, Bean vs. Achilles, Ender's jeesh, etc...

*mistaken

i read twilight first then seen the movie.it was very good.but breaking dawn i have seen movie first then rea book i know wat is going to happen next so it i notfelt that much good

I like to read first, so you can imagine how everyone looks like. Although I do sometimes see the movie, if I do not know there is a book.