runouw.com

Okay, at my school, people says that books are better than movies, or movies are better than books. We don't know that. It was a debate.

For example: the lightning thief, one student said that the book was better than it's movie, and one other student said that the movie was better than the book. There are advantages to both of them.

Advantage:

Book:

-It gives a good description of what's happening in the story.

-Some might give off a lesson to us.

Movies:

-Way more realistic than books (they can describe fiction)

-We can actually see the fighting, the drama and the action and adventure people are enduring

Disadvantage:

Book:

-It might be boring if you read for a long time

Movie:

-Maybe to addicting, then you can waste your time.

Which is better? Discuss.

One thing I tend to notice is that when you read a book, the characters have this appearance and/or voice in your head that you may think of them by (or something like that). Then when a movie of that book comes along, the acting and other visuals may throw the people that read the book off, since it may be way different from what they expected - sometimes good, sometimes bad. Sometimes, the movies have almost nothing to do with the original book (I recall it happening a couple of times before, but I can't remember specific examples).

ChaosYoshi wrote: Sometimes, the movies have almost nothing to do with the original book (I recall it happening a couple of times before, but I can't remember specific examples).

Yeah, that happens sometimes, but why do they make movies different from books, like you said, if they tend to be similar and/or same. It's supposed to match the book.

I feel like movies do a better job at telling a story, due to the director's ability to show you exactly what he was describing, but when attempting to convey any ideas the book does it better.