| Original message (2556 Views )
| Replies: |
| Pollyanna 1808th Post
 
Silver Carpet V.I.P- Platinum Executive
  
    
    
    
    
|  "Re(5):Da Vinci Code - movie thread -" , posted Sun 21 May 08:57
quote:
Because I know that the book is going to be better, I'd rather read the book first and then watch the movie. That way, I won't be spoiled while reading the book. I'd rather preserve all the surprises for the book then the movie. Because the book is better then the movie!
So you're saying, since the book is better, you don't want the movie to spoil the superior experience, even in the least?
I can agree with that, especially since watching the movie first cripples your sense of imagination when reading the book. I'd rather enjoy the inferior product (the movie) less than have the experience of the superior producy spoiled.
As for Harry Potter, I don't see any pain in watching the first 2 movies before the books (or even skipping the books), and I can even say you could watch the 3rd movie, then just read the last 50 pages of the book (trust me, that's the way to go), but the 4th movie is just a joke. It's a fast-paced, fun action film, but it's completely lacking everything (other than random excitement) that made the book good.
|
| Ammadeau 1508th Post
Red Carpet V.I.P- Platinum Member
| "Re(10):Da Vinci Code - movie thread -" , posted Sun 21 May 18:17
quote:
As someone who read the books first, I'd have to disagree. I remember forcing myself through most of that shit in gradeschool only because one of my friends was ape shit over it.
Umm, LOTR isn't really a grade school book, unless you're in love with fantasy so much you pass over 80% of the book you won't understand. Try reading it now, as I recently have been doing. Actually, skip the first half of the first book and get right to where shit starts happening. It starts off really slow, but after that it weaves an adventurous tale.
Though I can't say it's better than the movies because as Polly already said, they are very different in the details, and they have to be because there are things in the novel that just wouldn't work in a visual medium, while on the flip side there's something an actor can do with just a look that's less elegant in a book. I wouldn't really put them above each other, especially considering the time constraints imposed on the movies that forced it to cut a lot of material.
As for Da Vinci Code, can you make a good movie out of a terrible novel? Maybe, but I have no desire to see it.
Ammadeau.net - My own personal waste of time.
|
|
|
