NOTES FROM AN AMATEUR WRITER #47 - Books vs Movies: Who Wore it Better?
Notes From an Amateur Writer #47
This Blog series is an exercise in creative writing. Sometimes expressed in short story form, sometimes as a journal, or just my thoughts written down. It is a nursery of sorts for the stories that are on their way, or yet to be written.
This is post 15 in @dragosroua's January 30 day writing challenge.
Books vs Movies: Who Wore it Better?
I first became interested in the art of storytelling through the medium of film. I was never an avid reader as a young child – and I do regret this – and perhaps due to me being a predominantly visual learner movies were the gateway I used to enter this world. And it wasn't until I started to read Philip K Dick's work that I finally found an author that appealed to me enough for me to make a concerted effort to overcome my reading difficulties.
The novel of his that I chose to read first was Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? I chose this book because of my interest in the film Bladerunner. I love this film. From the very first time I saw it I was captivated. As I watched those 'outsiders' in their desperate attempts to meet their creator and become human, or more human-like, I felt a sense of intrigue that I had not felt from any film prior to that. Mind you I was only 10 years old when that film was released, so that shows you where my psyche was at at such a young age. I was watching human-like creations trying to understand who they really were. What their value was. Why they even existed. I didn't know the term at the time, but I was watching an unfolding tale of the human condition playing out through the visual medium. And I was hooked.
It was probably another ten years before I picked up a copy of Philip K Dick's novel. I found it at my local library, and as I read the blurb I must have recalled the connection between that book I held in my hands and Bladerunner. I was curious to know how it compared to the film. To see how a movie looks when it takes the form of words.
That was my first foray into the murky and contentious world of book adaptations. A topic that has produced a lot of discussion, and a lot of debate, and generated many strong opinions. I personally don't have a strong general opinion, preferring to take each case on it's merits. Although I can see that if one were keeping score, it does appear that books make by far the better version of the story.
With the case of Bladerunner vs Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? I was struck by the realisation that a complete comparison was not an easy task. They are not quite the same story. Yet the film is based on PKD's story. That much is true, so a comparison can be made, as difficult as it may be. And to me they both work, they are both brilliant portrayals of the story, and bring varying parts of it to life through the strengths of their particular medium.
The book goes into far more detail – as books do – about topics glossed over, or even left out altogether from the film. A major character in the book has taken on a different, but equally important role in the movie. The electric animals, of which the books title alludes to are missing from the film, with just the brief mention of the owl that Rachel has with her at the corporation's headquarters. And so too is Mercerism. Yet the core theme is still there. The story is still effectively the same. Yet I have an inability to choose between them.
I have the same dilemma with Fight Club. The film is brilliant. I am in no doubt about that. But the book offers a read, and a literary style so unique that I had to concede that yet again I could not split them. They both work, for reasons that relate to the medium they have used, and the way in which they utilised it.
But normally things are not so cloudy. Normally I can make a clear decision. If I had to take sides then I would steer more towards the books being the better version of the story. I know that translating a whole book to film means making drastic changes, editing out large chunks, and this does have an impact. If done well then that change shouldn't matter. But often it is doesn't work well.
- So what do you think?
- Do you have a firm opinion on this matter?
- Do you prefer one over the other?
- I would love to hear about some examples so feel free to share what you have noticed, and how you formed your opinion.
Images from unsplash.com and used with permission.
Thank you for taking the time to read this. If you liked it then please like, comment, and follow.
@naquoya
 |  |
|---|---|
Links to earlier works
- Fiction
My Fiction Writing Collection
Writing Myself Out of Existence
When the Levee Breaks
- Blog Posts
-Notes From An Amateur Writer
Notes #1 - #39 - Notes From An Amateur Writer Collection
Notes #40 - Read, Write, and Face the Future
Notes #41 - What Are Some Of Your Favourite Books?
Notes #42 - Website Review: Fiction University
Notes #43 - Seeking a Community Of Writers
Notes #44 - What Are Some of Your Favourite Characters?
Notes #45 - When Madness Came Knocking
Notes #46 - Why Do I Write?
-Ramble On (Humour based travel blog)
Introducing My New Travel Blog
Making a Deal With the Devil
-Poetry
We've had tons of discussions regarding this in the past, so you know my sentiment about it. All in all, it really is case to case basis. It's very interesting how the adaptation, well... adapts the root story. Obviously films can't go into the same depth and bredth as the books, so it's interesting to see what they leave in, what they leave out and what they change.
They have their strengths and weaknesses, and if these are respected and worked in harmony with, rather than against, then I think they definitely both can work. And from that perspective it is a case by case basis. Unfortunately some adaptations ave been done on the cheap, or have tended to hold the book itself in too much contempt and via far too much from the script.
Books I prefer, but they take a significant investment in time. So movies can be great to experience the story rapidly. And this works for me also.
Chuck Palahniuk said that the movie was far better than the book.
I feel as though it was great for his debut novel.
I hear James Franco is in the works of making the screen adaptation of Rant. Which would be cool.
I’m pretty torn about this though because Franco’s version of Stephen King’s 11/22/63 basically ruined the story. Of course it would have been a 57 hour movie if there were no cuts in the story.
As long as books are written, this will be a debate.
Be back to upvote this in a bit. (For the curation rewards).
Great read.
And if I didn't think the book was outstanding and very unique its style then I would agree hands down the movie is much better. Because it is brilliant, no doubt. It's just when I finally read the book I was captivated by the way he wrote. But only for that reason it is line ball for me. Not too many others I can say that about.
So long as they don't butcher the film then okay i accept it will never be the book.
For me it's movies first, and go only to the books if I can't follow the story, like some of the Harry Potter movies, I was forced to read the e-books and rewatch them again.... "Ahhhhhh, so that's what happened!" :)
Ah yes, I know that feeling. I have done that myself in the past. I remember being surprised after reading a book and finding clarity in a key point, and thinking, wow, I had it all back to front.
Movies are great entertainment, there is no doubt about that. They are an expressway to the city. Books are a slower trip through the hinterland. The ride takes a bit longer, but you see so much more. So it all depends on what works for you.
Thanks for your comment.
I do love the detail in a book but at the same time I like the changes necessary for an adaptation. My only gripe is when an apron is done badly which happens more often than not!
That's why overall I think books fair better in this equation. They do have so much more detail. The characters usually have more life and depth to them. A clever movie adaptation I don't mind. A cheap or silly one just annoys me (hello - The Dark Tower, I'm talking to you).
This is always an interesting question, especially since the majority of "blockbuster" materials find their sources in literature these days.
I know that I generally enjoy books far more than the movies. It's a difficult thing sometimes because reading a book before a movie allows you to build the world in your mind, so when you see it on the screen, most of the time it's disappointing. However, if you watch a movie first before reading the book, your mind will fill in the scenery and character descriptions based on the familiarities in the movie you've already seen.
It's quite a dilemma, but I'm going to keep reading and watching either way.
One book-to-TV show adaptation that I was very pleased with involves The Expanse, a series of science fiction novels by James S. A. Corey which has been adapted into a television series on the SyFy network. I did a review of the first book a long time ago and pointed out some of the reasons I thought the TV show was well-done.
Anyhow, thank you for the post. It's well-done and thought-provoking. I look forward to seeing more posts from you soon.
I agree with this sentiment. Your explanation of the potential costs of watching the movie first, or even reading the book first seems spot on to my experience. But that's a price to pay for loving great stories, and wanting to find more of them. In which ever medium. But the best do seem to start as books
I'm interested to read your analysis of The Expanse, thanks for letting me know, I'll follow up with a visit soon.
Thanks for your response. I'm excited about reading right now, so I'm going to hold onto this feeling as long as I can. Plenty of good books and movies slated for 2018, though. Hoping desperately to hear something out of old Martin about The Winds of Winter, but I've found other and arguably better books to fill that void that has existed since I last read that series in 2013.
Anyhow, thank you for your perspective. Let me know what you think of The Expanse review. I've only read the first three, but the series is complete now as the seventh book just came out recently. Honestly I haven't read them because they are still rather expensive per book, and I haven't forked it out. Perhaps I'll drop some STEEM to buy them.
Hoping to watch the show soon, and see what I think. Wont have a chance to read the books for a while, but will check the review you wrote and let you know my thoughts. I think television production has gone up a notch recently. When it comes to dramas. Production values seem to be getting taken seriously. Perhaps this is mostly on the streaming services, but it is happening.
Generally books are better, but sometimes the movies are so different you get to enjoy the story twice, and that can't be a bad thing!
Yes I do like to get two separate yet highly enjoyable trips through the story. Doesn't happen often though, does it? I agree, generally books win out, just based on what I have encountered overall.
Personally, I prefer the versions of characters my head creates... I am a reader from way back. A screen version of a character seems to move in and takes away the romance and relationship I have with a written character and its author. I try to avoid movies after books. Thanks for sharing your perspective.
It can be frustrating to see a book adaptation on film, and have the characters nothing like we envisage them to be. I think once you have a wonderful experience with a book, it can be hard to trust the story in the hands of another. It has become your own movie, played out inside your own head. Why let go of that?
Thanks for your comment.
The only PKD film adaptation I have really liked so far, is 'A Scanner Darkly'. But I share your dilemma when it comes to making a choice. I normally opt for the book, as that is closer to my own love of words, and it also provides more hours of pleasure, more input as to why it is or isn't a good story/book/approach.
I had forgotten about A Scanner Darkly. That was a very cool film. And that's what I mean about utilising the strengths of the medium to make something that book can't. But I agree, books do tend to offer a more thorough experience.
This is a great series. I need to go back and read the ones I’ve missed. I love the “who wore it better?” question. I have never seen or read Fight Club and evidently I’m missing out! I guess I will opt for the book over the movie, or certainly before seeing the movie, to get the richest possible experience.
You'll be reading for a long time, there are 46 prior ones. But this style of questions about books are all in the last 6 of them I think. I am enjoying reading about other people views on these topics. Learning a lot, and benefiting enormously as a result.
Fight Club is a one of a kind. I have heard you either love it or hate it. Not sure if this is completely true, but it wouldn't be far off. The movie blew my mind. It's style, it's story, it's social commentary. It did capture the heart of some pertinent questions. Those are all in the book too. The way they vary is in style. And I think both versions capture their mediums strengths incredible well.
I usually find the books to be better, but to be honest I'm often lazy to read them. If there is a movie version that I can spend 2 hours on then I'll use the 15 hours I would have spent on the book for something else. If I've already read and enjoyed the book I will usually watch the movie. Even if it is disappointing, it's still worth the audiovisual experience. The biggest problem I often have is when the chosen actors don't fit the profiles I had in my head of those characters. It just feels wrong then.
There are times when the movie actually surpasses the book in my opinion. Lord of the Rings was an example. I probably only feel this way because I saw the movie first, but I found that, although the books were wonderful and totally worth the read, for me the movies were even better because they cut out the boring bits and kept all the important parts. But that's a pretty rare thing.
Other times the movie is so different than the book that they can be equally enjoyed. Or I just wonder what the heck the screenwriter and director were smoking. The Lost World (sequel to Jurassic Park) was a bit of both for me. Dinosaurs in the city? What were they thinking? But the rest of the movie was great, albeit a pretty large departure from the book.
I have had a tendency in the past to gravitate towards the film versions due to my unwillingness to invest the time needed to read the book. I am trying to restore the balance in that equation at the moment though. As I study deeper into the topic of writing I am disciplining myself to read more, and even go back and read the book versions of films I enjoyed, to see how it works in novel format.
I think LotR capitised on the strengths of medium very well. With recent technological breakthroughs, a movie was able to be made that did seem to capture the true essence of that epic tale. So yes I agree with you on that one.
Thanks for sharing your views and experiences on this topic. I'm always curious how other people view this. It can be a polarising question.