Quote:
Originally Posted by issybird
It's axiomatic.  That said, books are far more important to me than film and I want my experience of the book to be unadulterated by the interpretation of a large group of people.
I find this to be rather absurd. Any reasonable person understands that the film version of a book has to involve significant cuts and changes and the choices made are interesting in themselves, if you've read the book first. Anger? It's a movie! Anger seems misplaced, to put it mildly.
The bottom line is that whichever you choose, the first will be a spoiler for the second. I prefer my books unspoiled, thank you very much, and can look to enjoy a film for performance, set direction, scenery, costumes and so forth that are in addition to and in support of the story being told. |
I too would rather read the book before I see the movie. I even read Star Wars before the movie was released. I remember watching the movie and thinking "this seems familiar somehow". Then I remembered I had read the book.
I always see a movie knowing it is going to be different than the book. Sometimes it is better than the book. More often it is worse to me.
Occasionally I will read a book after I see the movie. Usually because I did not know about the book. Years ago I saw the movie In Harm's Way and that made me want to read the book Harm's Way by James Bassett.
Apache