I think most readers will agree that it’s rare when a movie based on a book is better than the book. It’s because a movie has to condense so much story into such a relatively short amount of time that scenes have to be cut or abridged, and a lot of the detail that is spelled out (so to speak) in the book has to be shown as background or mood music in the film. It’s too bad, of course, but if directors didn’t do that, movies based on books would be epic films many hours long. I know a lot of people don’t mind sitting through longer movies like The Titanic and the Lord of the Rings films, but I don’t like to sit for that long, especially not in a theater where there’s no pausing the movie for a restroom/pop refill break.
But, I’ve discovered that if I read the book first, I’m almost always disappointed in the movie, because I come into it with a set of pre-determined expectations. If I watch the movie first, however, I almost always enjoy both the book and the movie, because the movie sets expectations that are always exceeded by the book. A little trick of the mind, so to speak.
When you know there’s a movie coming out based on a book you haven’t read yet, do you read the book first, or see the film first? Does the order influence your enjoyment of either story medium?
Wanna write? Pick a prompt!
Prose Prompt: A character walks into a movie theater where only one other person is waiting to see that particular film. The other person is reading a book of the movie about to be shown, and the first person strikes up a conversation with the question, “Why?”
Poetry prompt: Write a poem about your favorite or least favorite part of going to the movies.