Book vs Movie

Posted -

As new movies that were originally stemmed from books come out, including The Death Cure, the last installment of The Maze Runner series, more and more people are reading the book and seeing the movie to determine how they are similar and how they are different. There are always the minor things, like adjusting the look of a character or adding in a small scene, but what about the big stuff? There have been obsessions over the complete remodel of a character and the removing of large scenes from a novel. By doing this, the movie industry has robbed the public of the full understanding of the novel. Yet isn't that the point? That you need to read the novel to know everything about it?

Many people see popular book adaptations, such as Harry Potter, The Hunger Games, and The Book Thief, and think they have had the equivalent of reading the book. Those people are wrong. The book offers much more information than a movie ever could, including descriptions of the character's feelings, more scenes, and the reader's ability to imagine their own view of the book, instead of having movie critics bash on the bad movie when its book is incredible. A movie removes all of those elements by predetermining what the characters are going to look like, how they will act, what the scene will look like, and more. The book gives control to the reader, so that they can make their own adjustments to what the book offers, similar to the making of an adventure book. The reader can choose their path and go back if they do not enjoy it, or start over to get a completely different ending. There will never be a "create your own movie" franchise where a person has to fast-forward to the halfway mark in a movie to get to the next step of the adventure.

The big screen has always had its appeal to the people. For a couple of hours, they can get some food, sit down, and watch a movie that lets their mind be released of its worries. When watching the movie, a lot of people will criticize the actor for not making the movie great, but it is not his or her fault alone. There are many others who contribute to the production of the book-to-movie and could make it worse, which then dissuades people from reading the book. Although the opposite could also happen, where the book will rise in popularity after a successful movie adaptation. The big screen can either destroy a book's credibility, or make it the best seller the week of the movie's release.

I am biased in saying that the books are far better than the movies because books offer more than a movie ever could, but that does not mean that the movie is completely useless. The movie is able to get others interested in the story, give a better visual image of what the story looks like, and may even make a profit from merchandising, so that the book can have more public interest. It is in your hands to decide if the book is better than the movie or vice versa. Your own personal interests are what determines the kind of choice you make.

Editor's Note

Are you an aspiring journalist or just looking for an outlet where you can share your voice? Apply to write for Her Campus!

User login