Would You Choose To Never See The Film?

Welcome to Films and Books Forum, the place to chat about movies, post movie reviews, compare a book to its film adaptation, discuss what makes a good book-to-film adaptation, and suggest books which you think would make a great movie adaption.
Genaaa
Posts: 221
Joined: 09 Sep 2016, 21:51
Bookshelf Size: 18
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-genaaa.html
Latest Review: "A Messiahs Battle For The Human Realm" by Roberto Torres Rivera

Re: Would You Choose To Never See The Film?

Post by Genaaa »

I think there are definitely some cases where the movie is so much worse when compared to the book, that even seeing the movie sort of ruins the book. However, I still like to see the movies for the books even if they change a bunch of stuff. Sometimes, if you put aside your expectations from the book, the movie can be pretty decent on it's own.
Latest Review: "A Messiahs Battle For The Human Realm" by Roberto Torres Rivera
User avatar
Oshin
Posts: 8
Joined: 11 Sep 2016, 04:48
Currently Reading: Silent Witness
Bookshelf Size: 2
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-oshin.html

Post by Oshin »

If the movie has a chance of ruining the book, then yes, definitely!
User avatar
smhawkins
Posts: 53
Joined: 11 Sep 2016, 08:27
Currently Reading: The Art of Racing in the Rain
Bookshelf Size: 82
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-smhawkins.html
Latest Review: "Achieve Your Dreams" by Scott Hughes and A. Lynn Powers and Adam Buongiovanni

Post by smhawkins »

I'd agree that most books are better than the movies. However, the art of film-making is not the same as the art of literature. Yes, they're telling the same story, but they are two different mediums. There is no way that you can encompass all of the thoughts and nuances of the characters in a novel into a 1-2 hour film. For having such limitations, I think filmmakers do an excellent job at making these movies.

Look at Harry Potter! Everyone LOVES those films, even though we can all agree that the books are certainly better.

I think I am only really angry with movies when they completely disregard/are not true to the book.
Latest Review: "Achieve Your Dreams" by Scott Hughes and A. Lynn Powers and Adam Buongiovanni
hillajax
Posts: 10
Joined: 30 Aug 2016, 02:16
Bookshelf Size: 0

Post by hillajax »

I'm agree with you all guys. Whenever I read a book and see the movie, i find reading a book was quite more interesting than watching a movie. I don't know the exact reason, but in my opinion this happen because, while reading a book we imagine the character in our mind and that prescription can't be fulfilled through the movie because it's the directors and screenplay writer's opinion of how they see the book as. And when we watch their version of movie it hurts our feeling about characters that's why we choose to love book beside hating the movie. But in few cases I love the movie rather than book(i watched a movie 3 idiots(2008), adopted by Chetan Bhagat's Five Point Someone), because the story was quite different from original(Book Story).
User avatar
AK413
Posts: 20
Joined: 06 Sep 2016, 19:27
Currently Reading: Circling the Sun
Bookshelf Size: 110
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-ak413.html

Post by AK413 »

Yea there are a couple of movies I have chosen to skip. Hunger Games for instance, and Fifty Shades and the Time Travelers Wife. I wish I skipped the Twilight movies haha.
User avatar
lane_vespertine
Posts: 126
Joined: 18 Sep 2016, 22:55
Currently Reading: Ilium
Bookshelf Size: 18
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-lane-vespertine.html
Latest Review: "Hell Holes 2" by Donald Firesmith

Post by lane_vespertine »

For me, it was specifically the Harry Potter franchise.
I loved the books. When I was in high school, the third book had just come out and my drama friends and I were all 'atwitter.' I thought they were great. Then, a few years later, I saw the first movie and... never again.
Eventually I would stop being a fan of the books... especially since after the fourth one it took years between them, but no one can take away how amazing the first three were/are.
The big problem I had with them is just how small they were as compared to my imagination. Ron's hair wasn't red enough, Hermoine's everything wasn't right, and even the scar on Harry's head was in the wrong place. It was a series that depended on so much visual imagination that the movies could never live up to it.
Latest Review: "Hell Holes 2" by Donald Firesmith
User avatar
Dolphinlove1990
Posts: 6
Joined: 03 Oct 2016, 17:21
Bookshelf Size: 0

Post by Dolphinlove1990 »

I love doing both. Even if I loved the book I don't ever expect much from the movie. Its unrealistic. I mean, with a book you can do anything, go anywhere and see anything. With a movie we are very limited to what we can really do. So I go in with no expectations and either I like it or I don't. But either way, I don't mind that they make movies of books that I love, I will usually always watch them, for curiosity if nothing else
User avatar
Aleah
Posts: 20
Joined: 08 Oct 2016, 17:34
Currently Reading: The Fault in Our Stars
Bookshelf Size: 30
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-aleah.html

Post by Aleah »

Yes, I would choose to never see the film. I rarely do anyway since the books are much more enjoyable.
User avatar
easy_dc13
Posts: 117
Joined: 26 Mar 2016, 06:23
Currently Reading:
Bookshelf Size: 50
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-easy-dc13.html
Latest Review: A Trace of Revenge by Lyle Howard

Post by easy_dc13 »

Film adaptations are usually 2 hours of disappointment. Whether it's underdevelopment of story and characters, mishandling of stuff, they're usually just made to print some money. Once in a blue moon, I'll go see the film then if it's not that good, I have a reason to slap myself in the face.
User avatar
ebeth
Posts: 410
Joined: 02 Jul 2016, 16:31
Currently Reading: The Color of Destiny
Bookshelf Size: 69
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-ebeth.html
Latest Review: "Audiobooks.com Book of your Choice" by Audiobooks
Reading Device: B0097BEFA4

Post by ebeth »

Yes I would chose to never see the film. Sometimes it ruins the enjoyment after reading the book. Sometimes they ruin the ending, making it upsetting.
Latest Review: "Audiobooks.com Book of your Choice" by Audiobooks
User avatar
DATo
Previous Member of the Month
Posts: 5772
Joined: 31 Dec 2011, 07:54
Bookshelf Size: 0

Post by DATo »

I wouldn't say "never", but I would prefer to know in advance from critiques that the movie is faithful to the book before I would go out of my way to see it. I can think of twelve movies just off the top of my head which I thought were very faithful to the book within the limits imposed by time constraints. I found each of these productions to be a pleasure to watch.

1) To Kill A Mockingbird
2) The Old Man and The Sea
3) The Hunger Games (part1 - the mutts at the very end were slightly different but actually better in the film)
4) 84 Charing Cross Road
5) The Road
6) Fail Safe
7) The Godfather
8 ) The Red Badge Of Courage
9) Pride And Prejudice (1995 BBC miniseries)
10) The Hound Of The Baskervilles (BBC production with Jeremy Brett)
11) Cloud Atlas (The ascending / descending time format was differently presented but that was all and this format was better suited for film)
12) All Quiet On the Western Front (1930)
“I just got out of the hospital. I was in a speed reading accident. I hit a book mark and flew across the room.”
― Steven Wright
User avatar
Blue-siren
Posts: 37
Joined: 15 Nov 2016, 04:35
Currently Reading:
Bookshelf Size: 15
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-blue-siren.html
Latest Review: Puffy and the Formidable Foe by Marie Lepkowski and Ann Marie Hannon

Post by Blue-siren »

If a book is being turned into a movie, I tend to lower my expectation and if I really want to see it I go with an open mind. For me it really doesn't matter if I read the book first or see the movie then read the book but for most of the time I would wait to at least a year after I seen a movie to read the book (or vice versa).

Though If I know for sure that I wouldn't like the move adaptation of a book, I won't waste money on it and wait for it come on T.V. or become a cheap DvD.
User avatar
Tiff-thebookworm
Posts: 51
Joined: 03 Oct 2016, 15:44
Bookshelf Size: 13
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-tiff-thebookworm.html
Reading Device: B00KC6I06S

Post by Tiff-thebookworm »

For me it will be to never watch the other Fifty Shades of Grey films. I freaking loved the books, I mean I loved the books yet the first movie was a total crapper. I was so let down that I was tempted to walk out half way through the movie but didnt want to waste my money.
Though I walk by day, I treasure my nights with you.
User avatar
Adri300
Posts: 5
Joined: 15 Nov 2016, 19:15
Bookshelf Size: 0
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-adri300.html

Post by Adri300 »

Both film and books have their strengths and weaknesses. Being that they are different media outlets some things are better represented in others. People often forget this fact, complaining often that elements of the book were left out and such and such was missing. If every aspect of the book was included into the film application then the audience would get bored with a five hour plus movie. Most notably what I think of is the Harry Potter series, there were many things altered as well as pieces edited out to make a more concise plot. One example that I can think of is in the fourth installment of the series in which Harry must fight a dragon. Although this was a significant part in the book, in the film the dragon gets much more screen time than what is represented in the text. This is because actually watching a dragon is much more stimulating for an audience than other elements of the story. Both sources of entertainment have their pros but are better suited in different ways, something that people forget.

-- 15 Nov 2016, 19:26 --
User avatar
Polecat1
Posts: 7
Joined: 21 Oct 2016, 08:18
Currently Reading: The bone tree
Bookshelf Size: 42
Reading Device: B00JG8GOWU

Post by Polecat1 »

A book's characters, scenery, atmosphere, and action are all alive and vibrant in the reader's imagination. Movie adaptations pull all those things out of someone else's imagination, which rarely corresponds to mine. I seldom, if ever, want to see the movie after reading the book. Movies are also constrained by financing, by the prejudices and peccadilloes of the producers, directors and screenwriters, and by public reaction to subject matter. (Let us not forget avarice...)
One exception comes to mind: Margaret Mitchell's ''Gone With the Wind". Perfectly made in 1939, I can only imagine how the geniuses in Hollywood would bastardize it today.
Post Reply

Return to “Films and Books”