Which is better... the book or the movie?
Self explanitory
Books!
Side Score: 26
|
Movies.
Side Score: 12
|
|
|
|
2
points
Books, hands down. Most people who answer "movie" probably haven't read the book. I challenge anyone to read Nabakov's Lolita and compare it to the movie, East of Eden with its good, but bastard and inadequate counterpart, Heart of Darkness to the Hollywood remake: Apocalypse Now. Side: Books!
2
points
2
points
1
point
Point A) Books are most definitely not dyeing out. Libraries are flourishing and three times as many books are made compared to movies. Point B) Saying that books are not as exciting as movies is ludicrous. The movie came from the book, so if you have enough imagination then you see all the action clearer than that in a movie. Side: Books!
2
points
I love to read a book that they then turn into a movie and not be disappointed in the end. Books are important for the details are all there that they couldn't fit into a two hour movie. In a movie you get the gist of the plot with some detail but not all. I prefer to read the book but I've had it go the other way too...reading the book after the movie. One I can remember was a mini-series made for TV which was awesome in it's detail and story line. But there was still a bit more in the book they just couldn't cover. Side: Books!
Books give more detail of the scene is and gives a picture in your head, with a movie it gives the least detail and doesn't make you think about it, you see it that's it!! Book's make you imagine wat you think whatever you read, when you see a movie that came originally from a book you get usually dissapointed in what evverything looks like and they don't give great detail! AND THEY SKIP GOOD PARTS SOMETIMES! Side: Books!
1
point
|
1
point
1
point
|