Leave a comment

Comments 177

seraphina_snape August 16 2015, 18:49:55 UTC
Do you typically enjoy films that are based off of books or do you avoid them?
Depends on the book/movie. If I'm not into the genre, I'm not going to read the book OR watch the film. If the plot sounds interesting, I'll watch it. Generally it doesn't really matter to me if it's a book adaptation unless I'm a huge fan of the book - in which case I'll watch it and hope they don't fuck it up. If I've read the book and liked it okay, I'll watch the movie but don't worry much about how well they've adapted it. If I didn't like the book, I won't bother with the movie unless reliable sources tell me it's good.

Would you rather read the book or watch the movie first?
I prefer reading the book first. In some cases I haven't watched movies because I haven't got around to reading the book yet (*cough*hungergames*cough*). IDK, it's just less enjoyable to read a book when you already know what happens (even if it's probably not exactly what happens). With movies, I don't care so much. And it's more fun to imagine the characters and places ( ... )

Reply

mravenwood August 17 2015, 03:39:24 UTC
I like when film novelizations or tv tie-in novels mention relationships from the film/television, but I like it when the relationships are approached the same way as they are on the show/movie, as interactions throughout the actual plot of the movie or show. I don't like when stuff loses their plot just to follow a romance, but I sometimes like a well developed relationship in a film or films that explore relationships for reasons other than pleasing the box office. I wish films didn't feel like they automatically need to have a love interest though. It always seems better if that kind of stuff comes from the chemistry, not the requirement of films of any genre having romance ( ... )

Reply

seraphina_snape August 17 2015, 04:59:59 UTC
I wish films didn't feel like they automatically need to have a love interest though.

Times a million! Many movies already have more than enough plot without adding unnecessary romance. A lot of the time it's so unrealistic, too. You can definitely tell they only added "romance" so they can have a sexy scene or a woman getting undressed. *eyeroll*

I think I actually own one of the Psych tie-ins, but I haven't read it yet. :p

I'm a fast reader. Depending on the book, the time commitment isn't as big a deal for me. But there's still less effort involved in watching a movie. Plus, if I'm not sure whether I'll like it, I'd rather watch the movie. I'll be less mad if it turns out I don't like it. *g*

Reply

entwashian August 22 2015, 21:58:11 UTC
Don't read this Psych tie-in; it's super misogynist & gross.

I haven't read any since then BECAUSE it was so bad.

Reply


panda August 16 2015, 19:30:29 UTC
- Do you typically enjoy films that are based off of books or do you avoid them?
It all depends on the genre of the book, and or who wrote the book as well. And sometimes it depends on the content of the book as well.
- Would you rather read the book or watch the movie first?
Read the book first for sure! I like to get know the characters and imagine what the descriptions of the books before I see how it is turned into a movie based on someone's point of view.
- What are some example(s) of films or movies based on books that got it right?
Some of the Harry Potter movies, but not all of them.
- What are some example(s) of films or movies based on books that got it wrong?
The Twilight series all the way. They chose awful actors for the characters. I didn't imagine Bella looking like a goth chick. It was creepy.
- If you see a film based on a book does it make you want to go and read the book?
Yes, actually because I want to see how the author describes things in the book.

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

panda August 20 2015, 19:41:03 UTC
You're welcome, and I couldn't agree more about that as well! I was disappointed too!

Reply

gallaghers August 22 2015, 18:46:54 UTC
I feel the opposite about Twilight. I think the book characters (especially Bella) were quite dull and not well developed, and I think Kristen Stewart's portrayal of Bella did justice to the character considering. I don't necessarily agree with the movie adaption being bad when the original source wasn't that great itself; you work with what you've got.

Reply


mravenwood August 17 2015, 03:24:47 UTC
- Do you typically enjoy films that are based off of books or do you avoid them? I don't avoid them, but I don't seek out films that I know are based on books. I like some, and dislike others. If I'm a big fan of the book, I'll be excited and nervous for the movie. If I find out beforehand that something I am interested in seeing already is based on a book, I might read it. I've seen some movies that were based on books, and never found out until after. One of those was the movie Wetlands, and I really enjoyed the movie, even if it was pretty gross. I am interested in reading the book someday ( ... )

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

mravenwood August 18 2015, 02:25:39 UTC
It's so weird. From what I've read, he hated the movie. And when it was released, it was nominated for a Razzie too. It's kind of hard for me to imagine, because it's one of my favorite films in the horror genre.

Oh, yeah. I haven't seen too many, but a lot of the ones I have seen seem sort of average.

Reply

marishna August 18 2015, 05:26:57 UTC
Stephen King books are some of the hardest ones to adapt to screen, especially a 2-hour movie. Not that TV, with the potential for almost infinite length, does much better.

If he didn't like The Shining I'd hate to see what he has to say about The Langoliers or maybe even The Stand (although I suppose for the time it was good but it doesn't really stand up).

Reply


gallaghers August 17 2015, 06:16:56 UTC
Do you typically enjoy films that are based off of books or do you avoid them?: I don't avoid them, in fact I'd say I might even seek them out. I prefer books above TV and movies, but there are some books I just never got in to even if it had a great plot. I started reading The Hunger Games but I never finished because it just didn't draw me in, but I found the story interesting enough to see the movies. On the other hand, there are some books I like so much I wanted to relive it through film (The Hobbit). If the movie itself is good I'm not all that bothered if it differs from the books, because to me it's just a retelling from another person's perspective.

Would you rather read the book or watch the movie first?: Generally, I prefer to read the books first but it depends on the book/movie. If it's a series like Harry Potter I'd rather see the movie first, because I'm not the biggest fan of large series. I tend to lose interest.

If you see a film based on a book does it make you want to go and read the book?: Definitely. If I ( ... )

Reply

wagrobanite August 22 2015, 20:59:54 UTC
Drawing me is, or lack thereof is exactly how I felt about Harry Potter. So I stopped after the first book. Just did not interest me :D

Reply

gallaghers August 23 2015, 01:18:22 UTC
Same! I enjoyed the movies, but the book itself didn't interest me much and then there's the commitment to reading 7 books.

Reply

entwashian August 22 2015, 21:51:49 UTC
You make an interesting point about accessibility of books vs movies. For books, there's often only an author & an editor, so the author has almost complete creative control. A film passes through a LOT of different hands, though -- writer, director, editor, producer, etc etc, so often a film doesn't have as limited/specific point of view as a book can have.

For example, I know a lot of people in general avoid first-person narratives (as in The Hunger Games novels), which is an issue in written fiction that doesn't really exist in film.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

wagrobanite August 22 2015, 20:58:29 UTC
I loved the cider house rules, though I saw it before I should have in terms of understanding everything because I went back and read the book and was like... woah.

I agree any book over 400 pages, it's extremely tough to make a good movie out of. Like Les Miserables. The first movie version was absolutely terrible.

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

wagrobanite August 24 2015, 11:02:14 UTC
Yes ive seen it, amd i dont know, i have a loce hate relationship with it... The cinemaphotogrplaphy is amazing but Hugh doesnt have the voice ( hes a baritone not a tenor as the role calls for) for it. Eddie Redmanye is fantasic but Amanda Seyfried is horriblely... So yah im torn about that verison... I highly recommend viewinf one of thr Anniversary specials done in London (though the 25th of these is visually stunning, Nick Jones cant sing worth shit. But other than him, its very good.).

Reply


Leave a comment

Up