Black Woman Reading a Book

now matter how good it is a movie can never do justice to what the author intended or imagined when he or she was writing a story. I recently watched a tv series that was based on one of my favorite books growing up and it just butchered the whole story line. I'll take a book over a movie any day.

Books let you get into the thinking behind the action. Movies are better at showing the action. BUt rarely have I found I book I loved that was made into a good movie. Andromeda was a pretty good adaption. Hunt for Red October was the worst.

I can't read :(

same here.

Fact. Almost without exception.
Books make you use your mind, your imagination, your intellect, while stiring your emotions and often putting you in a different world.

Movies (and sometimes the small screen) are entertainment that often tells you what to think and pushes emotional buttons. Good entertainment but not often thought provoking.

Seeing movie or small screen adaptations of a book AFTER reading the book... almost always a let down.

Cinema ...welp that's a different story. ; )

Y? Shouldn't it be Z?

LOL!!

Couldn't stay for the Zebra, huh?

Never said I wasn't ashamed.

Comedy is my ultimate goal in all things. It's good to be appreciated.

It is

um not really harry potter is good but it goes downhill

But the books are arguably better than the movies, right?

yeah thats why i mentioned them

Personally I think "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" (movie) was a GREAT rendition of the book and only captured/highlighted the text in a way only possible in film. I mean....is it better? I guess in that it's handed to the viewer as opposed to making the reader envision it themselves. However it is perfectly done (in my opinion) so the viewer is getting the BEST version of the book visually possible.

Hey, look, we agree on something. Depp was great in that.

there are always two sides.
some times for me, books can be boring, I find no interest in reading them. but if i watch a movie based on the book, and i like the movie, then i am inspired to read the book and watch how it was supposed to play out.
sometimes i enjoy books, I get to make my own fantasies and pretend to be the characters and have my own fantasies, about what they do off-page.

so i like both, in different ways

Yes, there can be a charm to both, in different ways.

Of course, Syd. I would never do these kinds of things for free

One still frame picture in a movie is worth a thousand words. Add another still frame for another thousand words AND you've created movement to the eye for visual entertainment. Add back ground music, you've enhanced it more. Add special effects.. even more better. No question at all.. Movies are better than books.

Guess you don't like using your brain

I can make those pictures in my mind quite nicely. ;-)

Can you do CGI? Avatar? or the uniqueness of a human face acting it out smiling, crying, calm, angry? Does your mind pick the perfect music, story board it, set all things into perfection and synchronized metaphor? Producers and directors do that. They hit it out of the park into perfection. In fact everything they do is in addition to the written story/script or book which starts it all.. and then therefore superior. I think the idea that books are better is a sort of desired egoism or self esteem from giving self to the discipline of reading which tends to lean on the connection, meaning, trauma bonding, or journey to find meanind in life which you get out of stories. But you could get a better sense of all of that from a movie or tv show.. than from a book. You might argue that books are better if you're struggling to build intellect so as to slow things down and grasp all the deeper meaning.. where as movies flat out freight train us with so many right things and ideas.. that you really need a strong investigative D.O.S. to sort it correctly and bring self along for the ride.

No, I simply create 3D worlds in the minds eye, where I can slow down and re-read to get the full effect of the setting of each scene, and emphasize with the characters around me. Even producers and directors need to do this in order to visually portray to the world how they see the book. And if there are different people taking on the same book, you can get something different with each perspective. A movie gives a feeling of an immersive world, but a book can provide entire worlds with the same words.

Books FTW. ;-)

"They hit it out of the park into perfection"
"Perfection"
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
The movie was way worse than the book (which was already the worst of the books)
Why? Because movies have a limited runtime and budget and so many things that can get in the way (actors getting sick or injured, not enough time and money to produce it, etc.)
What you're watching is the imagination of the director/producer (and other staff) that came from the imagination of the original author
But with a book, there's no limit. Books aren't rushed. Books don't have a word limit. The author's ideas can all be poured into the book.
When you are reading a book, it's just you and the author's imagination, words, and story
You are free to create an entire world of your own based on the sentences printed on those pages
But when you watch a movie, you are restrained to only one version
That extra freedom of imagination is what gives a book the edge over a movie

What is not there.. in a book, which you have to imagine is not a plus. It's an inadequacy. Tis better to be.. than not to be. lol The limitations of the movie maker are in HOW MUCH more they will be able to add to the story in the book. If you can imagine so much from a book.. imagine how much more you can imagine from a color image, plus sound, plus special effects, plus massive efforts in building excitement, and offering a picture of all that the text was talking about.

But that color image, plus sound, plus special effects, plus massive efforts in building excitement does not promote imagination because you are stuck watching only ONE version of the story

Is this a nano is more tactic? Less is less. More is more. Nano is small.. not large. lol The subconscious drive to want to esteem small as more is a hunger for knowledge so as to set rock, paper, and scissors in order. Yes little details matter and can make massive differences.. but the emotional child in awe, pondering, and holding that perspective is small and or inferior to knowledge.. not a critical thinker. He conjures the emptiness of his mind into Skull Island exaggerations. He projects errors of the observer into what he wants to see as truth. In other words fill your minds hard drive with identity to eliminate a bias and then that emptiness won't tell you less is more. Also per Dunning Kruger the less you know in solid state on the hard drive WHILE connected to True Self.. the more your world view tends to be a xener diode. In other words it's important to get an emotional reciept in self to build knowledge based or your critical thinking tends to be detached.

No, what I'm saying is that movies have boundaries, books don't

And I didn't understand even half of what you said

Sorry.. I just goofed that metaphor with the xener. It's Zener diode.. and they were not exactly what I was specifically looking for. They flow in reverse. I was going for a diode because they are one way.. and then a Zener because I thought it can be low flow reverse which is to say limited input as the mind who thinks it knows it all tends to be one way, but also have limited inputs or be codependent, having a needy, emotional inner child hungry for belief.

What the hecc is a zener diode?
What are you even talking about?

The mind is a binary computer.. lol It can tend to be single minded, one way, self centered, and intolerant.. only wanting to see things it's way.. as if the world or more importantly truth revolves around the emotional inner child. We are emotional beings.. not knowledge based. Most ppl self avoid. When you do this.. that sets a bias to your thinking so that your point of view on things can be flawed. It's like Chicken Little seeing the SKY falling.. that is a story illustrating our inferior or small inner self, True Self.. the id, the Shadow, or Forbidden Planet's Krell monster machine, Maleficent's ugly yarn machine. That muddles up your critical thinking or the ability to discern what is superior as you have to do with knowledge in the game of rock, paper, scissors. The id instead prefers one way thinking.. like a diode. Diodes are one way devices in electronic mico circuitry, used to control the flow of logic gates like And gates, Or gates, exclusive and, exclusive ors. The electronic version of a binary computer is made of diodes basically.. the mind then being a binary computer is a lot of diode circuits to say yes or no, +5 volts or 0 volts. The mind is also like a hard drive and ram. Where if you are NOT in touch with your emotional inner child, your memory is free floating/not solid state or not easily accessible. ALL these errors and traits of the mind.. might lead you to say, a book in text which is ONLY a book in text is more than a movie which starts with that book in text and adds, and adds, and adds. You would not say iron ore is more than the Eiffel Tower because of all the things you could imagine that you could do with iron ore. You would not say the rosin and canvas are more than the Mona Lisa because of all the other things that you can do with rosin & canvas. These things are not done. It is what is.. that counts. Not what could be. It is what has been done that counts.. not what you could've done. To refuse this simple logic of positives counting in favor of imagined larger ideas is one way thinking around the emotional inner child's desired point of view and lack of definition of self. It is the King of Siam offering Siam as the center of the universe in The King and I.

Once again, the attraction of a book is how simple it is and how you are able to conjure up a whole world based on description alone
You want all those bells and whistles, and sure, they do have their own perks. But, it's more complicated to make BECAUSE of all those bells and whistles
If one bell or whistle is off-key, the whole machine will be a mess

^^^^ paid book shill.

Yes, both have their pros and cons.
Movies, or the replica of the painting based on the description, has the advantage of being physical, which means everyone can enjoy it, young or old. But, it has the disadvantage of being complicated. It will take a long time to paint, lots of resources (like the paint and canvas) and consideration (such as, "Is this color the best choice?" or "Will this color mix well with this one?"). And if one thing goes wrong, like a brushstroke or color palate mix-up, it will extremely decrease the quality of the painting, sometimes even ruining it.
Books (or the description), on the other hand, has the advantage of being simple and easy to fix (since it is all in your head). But, it has the disadvantage of reader difference. The person receiving the information will imagine and therefore understand the story in their way, and it all depends on their ability to imagine. So, a person without any imagination will enjoy the story less than a very imaginative one.

A movie does not add to a story of a book
It is merely a representation of one

Which is better.. a book with only text of if they add pictures? Which is better a book in only text or if it is on Audible as told by James Earl Jones? Which is better only voice over spoken word narration or an actor telling the story with change in pitch to his voice? Which is better only changing pitch to your voice while storytelling OR adding meme's? Which is better.. adding memes to your posts or adding gif's? Which is better gifs or Vines? Which is better Vines or Youtube vids? Which is better home made Youtube vids or professionally made vids? Which is better pro internet work or full scale high budget movie productions? Which is better.. black and white tv or color? which is better silent movies or talky's? which is better talkys with excitment or sob stories? Alll depends on your pov? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder? yes on some levels, what the individual appreciates best is up to him.. but in the case of storytelling by books, performance art, spoken word narration, or movies there is a tidal wave of an argument saying more bells and whistles is more better.

Also, your examples are not correct
A book is not the rosin and canvas, but it's more like if Leonardo da Vinci described the Mona Lisa to you. Her face, her hair, the expression she is wearing. Its quality varies based on how vivid your imagination is.
While a movie is when somebody tries to recreate the Mona Lisa based on the description given to them. Its quality varies based on how good the skills and imagination of the painter are.
When you watch a movie, or see the recreation of the Mona Lisa, it will never be able to compare to the original made by the author, or da Vinci.

The idea is correct.. in that less refined things are less than more refined things. Both books are movies are storytelling. A book is ONLY narrative, unless YOU with YOUR imagination ADD more to it. That added variance on the book is YOUR mind.. not the book. A movie is the narrative of the story expressed in a more complicated form than exclusively words and text. 26 letters of the alphabet converted into English words are extremely more limited and unrefined as compared to all the words, pictures, music, art, action, in the world which can go into a movie.

Except maybe the Shining...😉

The Shining movie by Kubrick was quite different than the book.

It is, but still a good movie. They always mess up the endings. Cujo really made me mad when it came out! The book ending was way better!

It's true!

^^^^^^
Biased opinion.

What can I say, a writer has to love reading and readers ;)