Can you guys help a kid out? :) A research question for YOU!

Hello there fellow bloggers and way cool visitors! I have a favor to ask of you. For those of you who don’t know, I write a monthly column for the Upper Bucks Free Press.

I write for the UBFP Newspaper!

I write for the UBFP Newspaper!

For my next column I wanted to write a story about which is better – the book or the movie. I thought I would do my own research for it, so I made a poll… but I need really wonderful people to answer my poll so I can have something to write about. 😀

I know that most people that visit my blog are book people so I am interested in knowing what you think. If you have time, please answer my poll and/or leave a comment about what you think. Is the book always better than the movie?

Thank you for taking the time to read this post!

Categories: Other Stuff Related to Books and Reading

45 replies

  1. Voted! Great idea, Erik.

  2. Mom voted. Apparently, she mostly likes books better than their movies. She likes being inside the characters’ heads. Sometimes she even tries to get inside MY head. She’s usually sorry afterwards. She says it’s wild in there…..

    Love and licks,

  3. I voted, Erik, and I agree exactly with Ms. Petrillo and Cupcake 🙂 I think the only movies I’ve ever seen that I think even come close to doing the book justice (and I still liked the books better) are Gone With The Wind and The Time Traveler’s Wife. The experience of reading a book allows you to imagine things in your own way and get inside the characters in a way that you just can’t with movies.

  4. I do think the books are better than the movies, but I am a reader through and through. 🙂 It’s a bit like comparing apples and oranges as books and movies create completely different experiences. Books provide a depth to the character’s thoughts and inner life that a movie cannot reach, but a movie (if it’s done well) can give a rich, layered visual experience. My sons and I often talk about having to “let go” of the book in order to enjoy a movie made from a book because by it’s very nature, the movie will be quite different! I’ll be interested in reading your article, Erik!

    • We had a “book club” where me, my Mom, and my aunt would read a book that was made into a movie, and when we are all done, we all watch the movie and compare the two. We don’t care about minor differences (ex: kid is of different nationality), but get upset if a major detail is wrong (ex: kid isn’t in movie).
      Thanks for voting!

  5. The only movie I have seen that is better than the book is The Natural with Robert Redford. Often, the book is unrecognizable in movie form (Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, Mr. Popper’s Penguins, Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs).

  6. This is very cool! Have voted, Erik.

  7. Very interesting poll. I added my vote for books being better than the books. For me, the only book-to-screen adaptation that worked marvelously was the LOTR series. There are many that have been done well, but the LOTR movies knocked it out of the park for me.

  8. I voted for the book mostly being better than the movie, but as others have said, they’re really different experiences. I know I’m disappointed when some of my favorite scenes are left out of a movie, or when the characters aren’t like I’ve imagined them — but it’s impossible to put a whole book into a movie, word for word.

    A couple of movies that I’ve liked BETTER than the books (well, they’re made-for-tv movies, but I hope that counts) are Eloise at the Plaza and Eloise at Christmastime. The movies fleshed out the books, added characters and storylines that made the whole idea more interesting for me.

  9. Holes is the only movie I’ve watched that measured up to the book. It followed the original story so closely that I could barely differentiate. Usually that doesn’t happen. I did answer your poll, Erik. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to participate.

  10. Usually, I like the book more than the movie. But there have been a few, rare films which I felt were better than their source material, such as…
    Dr. Mabuse, The Gambler: Most of the book was better, but the ending was so anti-climactic that I thought it brought it down. Fritz Lang was right to change the ending for the film. It made the story better.
    Men In Black: Fun movie based on a truly awful comic.
    My sister (who is an even bigger bookworm than I am) also tells me that Who Framed Roger Rabbit worked better as a movie than as a book.

  11. Good for you for doing this! I almost always like the book better than the movie. Sometimes books are full of the characters thinking, and that doesn’t translate to movies. I feel like a lot of what’s in the book gets left out, and I miss it. Perhaps another article could be asking folks which books they felt best (and worst) translated to movies – you are getting some ideas here!

  12. One book I didn’t like more than the movie was Like Water for Chocolate, but I later read that the author was a screenwriter, and maybe that’s why the director could take it so much further!

  13. I voted. What a great idea. Can’t wait to read your article. As a reader I mostly prefer the book. But my husband, who is not a reader, has an opportunity to experience some of my favourite books by watching the movie with me. I can always fill him in on the missing bits. Just think, without the Lord of The Rings movies, which he loves, he would not have known those amazing stories. He watches all the Jane Austen movies with me too and loves them. So I believe that books and movies are both important and I’m so glad film makers turn great books into movies.

  14. P.s. I love both Film and Book as they are different mediums.

  15. Voted! Great idea for a poll, Erik! As a former bookseller and librarian, I nearly always believe the book is better. But I have to admit I found the LOTR movies superior to the books. To me, the books were too dry, and parts were boring.

    With a book and movie like Hunger Games, I liked them both, for different reasons. No movie can really do justice to a complete book, or contain all the details the book contains (and films often changes key details, making book purists cry), but as a film, the Hunger Games movie was hugely entertaining, with a lot of stunning visual imagery. Not how I pictured it when I read the book, but really cool nonetheless.

  16. I like books so much better than movies that I hate watching videos, preferring to read a pdf. I like reading and even read cereal boxes while I eat. Like menus over picture boards, and libraries over movie houses. I do like television late at night – only exception.

  17. I voted Erik and I think that the book is almost always better than the movie because you can’t really get the same depth in the characters in a movie. The Hunger Games is a great example. In the book, you get to fully understand Katniss – much of the book involves descriptions of what she is thinking. In the movie, she’s just not as great a character; she doesn’t come across the same way.

  18. Hi Erik, I just voted for “books are mostly better.” Movies have visuals that can add dimension and special effects, beautiful costumes, great scenery, blood and gore :), and actors bring their own interpretation (or a director’s) of the characters. Plus, movies have scores which makes them a double treat. I love going to the movies, or watching them at home. However, a book is a personal experience. It’s a story direct from the author to you. No other interpretation, no misrepresentation, no missing pieces. I’d be lost without books. I have seen movies that were definitely better than the books. But not in all instances. Again, I think it’s because of the personal nature of a book. If I have my own idea of the characters and story and it’s different when it appears on screen, it’s a disappoinment—even if the director and cast did a good job.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: