Today’s prompt:
Books and films both tell stories, but what we want from a book can be different from what we want from a movie. Is this true for you? If so, what’s the difference between a book and a movie?
When a movie is based on a book, I almost always prefer the book over the movie. In fact, I can’t think of an example of a movie I like better than the book. There are a few movies that at least come close (Pride & Prejudice (BBC), Harry Potter V, The Lord of the Rings). I usually want a relatively simple story from a movie with lots of character development, but there are numerous exceptions to this rule. I do think movies can be particularly powerful because of the use of more senses. I get more, though, from books. It seems to me that books have more time to develop characters. Also, movies have a hard time getting us into the heads of the characters, where books can easily accomplish this. I’m not a visual learner, so I feel like I learn more from books too. I appreciate movies, but I LOVE books.
{ 3 comments }
I would argue that a movie engages in *fewer* senses than a book. There are only the auditory and visual elements. A writer with a deft hand at prose, however, can also evoke smell, taste, and touch–abet in a more imaginary way.
Yes books can develop characters better because movies have time constraints not to mention, you can’t see inside the characters head..
It’s nice to meet another blogging bluestocking
“I appreciate movies, but I LOVE books.”
Yes indeed. That says is all :)
Comments on this entry are closed.