Thursday, May 26, 2011

Movie or Book?

Here's some food for thought...

Would you rather read a book and then have it made into a movie or see the movie and then read the book that inspired it?

I've experienced both situations. I saw the first Harry Potter movie which made me curious to read the books and with Twilight, I read the books before the first movie came out. Personally I prefer to read the book first and then if there happens to be a movie, I'll watch it. The reason being is I like taking the author's words and forming what I think the world looks like in my head. Books are also able to give more depth, description, and background than that of a movie - mainly because of time constraints. Though, I will admit, it is nice to see what you portray in your imagination live on screen.

Take Harry Potter for example. I believe that Goblet of Fire is the worst movie of the series. It feels, to me, incredibly rushed, disjointedly pieced together and does not do the book justice. I understand that the length of the books increase as the series went on and things needed to be prioritized as to importance to the story but I believe that in this case the story was completely edited. For example, the two Academies that join Hogwarts in the competition do not arrive at the beginning of the school year they arrive after it has started. We do not see the Dursley's and the Weasley's meet for the first time when they arrive to pick up Harry - which in my opinion would have been hilarious! Again, it is understandable the difficulties in converting a thick book into a movie with time constraints but in the case of the Goblet of Fire I feel too much was cut.

Opinions? Thoughts?

Random Fact: 50% of all marshmallows sold will be roasted.