Book Before Movie or Movie Before Book?

[ross2287]

Given the chance, I'd love to read a book before I see the movie. I'm currently reading "The Rum Diary" in anticipation of the film coming out next summer.

Most of the times, the books are better than the movies, in my opinion. I can only think of a few instances where this is the opposite--Big Fish and Watchmen.

Yeah, I said it.

 

[ChickenScratch]

Why is it that barely any men read?

I've got degrees in English Lit and Journalism and I'm a man so that throws your theory out.

As far as book or movie first. I really don't care but because my job is reading and my hobby is reading I usually read something long before the movie and end up forgetting it then having to read it again.

 

[Sam Fisher]

I plan on reading HP6 before the movie.

 

[ross2287]

With Harry Potter, I've seen all the movies and never once read the books. I'm not even a fan but I'm probably going to wait until all the movies come out before I read all the books.

 

[Wesley Dodds]

Before if i can help it. It's not always important but a lot of the time reading the source material can enrich the viewing experience... Watchmen is a good example. The more you knew going in, the more you were gonna get outta that movie...

 

[Mdizzle]

Before if i can help it. It's not always important but a lot of the time reading the source material can enrich the viewing experience... Watchmen is a good example. The more you knew going in, the more you were gonna get outta that movie...

I'd agree with this, and it was especially true seeing how closely the film followed the graphic novel.

I tend to read the book first, because that's usually where it all starts--you get the author's unspoiled account of how things were originally envisioned. Now, that being said, I don't mind seeing the movie first on some accounts. I think the important thing in any case is to realize that the film is usually a different interpretation of the novel, and that some elements don't translate well from book to screen. Some sequences are played up, others deleted because they don't work cinematically, etc.

Some examples of movies I've seen and neglected to read the book as of yet: The Bourne series, Harry Potter series, Children of Men. Apparently the Bourne novels were especially good.

I saw The Silence of the Lambs/Hannibal/Red Dragon first, then went back to the read the books. Damn, what detail you got going to the novel...same deal for The Bone Collector. I'd recommend both even if you've seen the movie/know what happened.

 

[simplysuperhero]

I think you're damned either way. The movie is usually disappointing if you read the book first. I did this with Silence of the Lambs. And if you read the book you kinda know what happens and can't get the actor's face of the protagonist out of your head.

 

[Mdizzle]

I think you're damned either way. The movie is usually disappointing if you read the book first. I did this with Silence of the Lambs. And if you read the book you kinda know what happens and can't get the actor's face of the protagonist out of your head.

That's true enough. I guess if I read the book first, I'm more just interested to see how things pan out visually I guess, even if I have an image in my mind how the characters should look. Take any of Michael Crichton's books for example--having read most of them first, I was just impressed to see the on-screen sequences, even if sometimes the movie was lacking.

 

[BatMatt]

Book before movie I believe as always been the case for me:

The Green Mile
The Mist
The Prestige
Watchmen

Some I had read before their movie adaptations hit the screen, but I still believe its the best way of approaching the situation.

 

[simplysuperhero]

If I do read the book before seeing the movie or vice versa, I try to have at least a few weeks before doing the other. Time helps get the book/movie out of my mind.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

I have no rule. If I discover the book first I read it first, if I discover the movie first I watch it first.

I will say that if I read the book first, a good movie is still a good movie, however, at times I find it hard to get into a book I've seen as a movie. I think it's because books can sometimes take too long to do something. For example, I tried to read The Bourne Identity after seeing the movie. I gave up after about 100 pages because at the point the movie was only at the twenty minute mark. It had gone of in tangents that I might have found entertaining if I didn't know the end result

You should try reading The Bourne Identity again, those aren't tangents the book goes in, the book and movie plots are radically different from one another. They really are two different stories, the sequels are even worse as adaptations, probably 90-95% different from the books.

I plan on reading HP6 before the movie.

That's probably a bad idea, since the movie will probably be butchered, you'll just be thinking of all the great and important scenes that were cut from the movies.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

Movie before book. It's easier to visualize it as I read it that way. Also, it's easier to like or enjoy the movie before you read the book. My mom and sister read the Da Vinci Code before the movie and hated the movie. I didn't think it was that bad.

 

[Mdizzle]

You should try reading The Bourne Identity again, those aren't tangents the book goes in, the book and movie plots are radically different from one another. They really are two different stories, the sequels are even worse as adaptations, probably 90-95% different from the books.

Didn't know that. But, having never read the book, I can honestly say I can appreciate the film's plot/story for what it is, as many discrepancies as there may be from the book.

 

[danoyse]

I try to read the book first, if I can. I just read The Lovely Bones a few weeks ago and I'm really looking forward to the movie. It's not really a story where you have to worry about heavy spoilers, it's more a drama and the secrets are told really within the first few chapters.

Of this year's movies I've read Watchmen, Angels & Demons, and Harry Potter 6 before seeing the movies.

I'm reading To Kill a Mockingbird right now, but I've seen the movie before. It's an amazing book, but it's hard not to see anyone else other than Gregory Peck as Atticus Finch. I also read The Exorcist after I saw the movie.

I read LOTR before I saw the movies, but I enjoyed the books more when I read them again after seeing the movies. I've read The Kite Runner, but I still haven't seen the movie.

So it depends. I don't make myself read the book first, but I usually try to if it's a movie a I really want to see.

 

[Asteroid-Man]

I watch half of the movie to get an idea of how I can imagine people (but if someone deosn't fit the description in the book then I'll "recast" them. Generally I imagine the soundtrack if there is no distinct one in the first half of the film.) Then I read the book, and then watch the movie.

 

[Max J Power]

Movie first. I have a bigger attachment to movies than books, so if I'm going to experience a story one way, I'll go with movies more often. But there are some exceptions:

1. If a highly acclaimed book I'm interested in is made into a not-so-highly-acclaimed movie, and then I'm inclined to read the book first (like Slaughterhouse-Five; read the book, never seen the movie).

2. With comics, I try to read the source material before the movies if I haven't read it already.

3. I'm most inclined to read a book and watch its adaptation when both are acclaimed in their media, especially if the two are different (like Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep and Blade Runner).

Plus, a lot of books I've read haven't been made into movies and probably never will be.

 

[ross2287]

I think you're damned either way. The movie is usually disappointing if you read the book first. I did this with Silence of the Lambs. And if you read the book you kinda know what happens and can't get the actor's face of the protagonist out of your head.

That's not necessarily true...at least not in my case. When I was reading "The Da Vinci Code" I knew that Tom Hanks was going to be the main character. That didn't stop me from picturing someone who looked an awful lot like Guy Pearce while I was reading.

 

[DarKJediKnight]

Whichever I discover first.