That's exactly how it is for me- if I have followed the author (and I do read alot however mainly older books so not alot of modern authors), so usually if it's based on a super modern novel I haven't read it- and I only see offbeat unusual movies, so if i discover that movie is based on a book, then i will make a note of the author. Now I'm an avid Augusten Burroughs reader, so i was nervous when Running with Scissors came out, and I was Shocked because it was done justice IMO on the big screen, it didn't receive great reviews but it was quirky, dark, and not really a hug mainstream catch anyway I'm also an avid reader of Mary Gaitskill- and so when I saw Secretary after reading it, and they totally changed the male character and turned in from a dark ending into a happy comedy romance with a happy ending i was totally put off- and I read later that Gaitskill herself said, "they made a walt diseny princess version of my movie"- she thought the movie was joke, but the director wanted to make the ending more politically correct by making it turn out that everyone falls in love and everything is ok, because that's what the public is most comfortable with- Gaitskill's writing is very dark and ppl want to be entertained, not sit with uncomformtable realities, so they smeared that one. Bug- this I saw, not knowing WHAT to expect because it was so poorly marketed, and it was one of the most intense psychological dramas/thrillers of my life, and this is where I discovered actor Michael Shannon, who originally opened Bug as a play and starred in the movie- and the movie is therefore quite accurate to the play, and keeps the very subversive tone and dark ending- sorry I like dark endings- I 'm not saying there's a time and place for happy or ambiguous ones, I just think that hollywood avoids them too much. Some ppl used movies as a way of escaping reality, i just really like using movies/literature as a way of delving into the deepest labyrninths of it, no-holds-barred.
I love American Psycho. I mean, it's nowhere near as deep as the book, and the book has so many awesome parts left out; and the movie loses most of the satire, but it's a great dark comedy nonetheless. One of the few movies I could watch over and over. The business card scene and the ATM scene are amazing, especially.
True. I think i ought to see the movie again (although i rememeber the scenes u mentionned). When i read the book, there were times when i actually felt nauseous, yet so fascinated i couldn't stop reading, thats how good it was. The movie is much less humorous.
one book that was GREAT- and the movie did it justice was "One flew over the COoCoo,s Nest" IMO 95% of the time the book is better. It forces you to use your imagination and devolope your own conclusions and thoughts. Most of the time I find the film uses the actors, and the directors to move or restict your imagination to the direction Hollywood wants it to go. Lots of books are written out of love,passion or inspiration- - lots of movies are made for the cash- or profits justthoughtson arainyMonday, jjack
No, I'm the total opposite. I like to read the book first and then when I see the movie It's kind of fun to see how similar it is to the book and see the book come to life. :sunny:
it depends on how much you enjoyed the movie version. better or not - if a film version is vastly different to a book and the viewer enjoyed said film even a good book can become warped by its unfamiliarity.
I much prefer to read the book first. Most films are never as good in my opinion, and so much is left out from the original book. Besides, if I saw the film first, then my imagination would have nothing to do when reading it - I'd imagine everything the way someone else has i the film. That's one things I love about books. There are a few films I still haven't seen because I am waiting to read the book first.
Naturally book first. The movie is only about how the director imagines the book, it's his interpretation. If You watch the movie first, You don't have a chance to draw up your idea of the characters and settings, don't you think?
Films rarely take the opportunity to use the audiovisual medium to really turn the written narrative into a creative vision. I could probably name the ones that have done this on one hand. One that comes to mind is The Thin Red Line, which isn't just a retelling of the book but a thematic exploration made through images and snapshots from the story in that book.
I always read the book 1st ( books go into more detail and you make a picture in your mind about the characters/location and the whole storyline in general ),Then if i do decide to watch the film i always find it a big letdown even if the book was good. So if i do decide to watch a film i never read the book.I hope that made sense lol
With me it has always been chance coming upon a subject that interested me. That there is a book or a movie about it is just coincidental to the subject and are both adequate in their own right.
