Book vs Movie – Which Is Better?

Sep 22, 2010 | 4 Comments | @andrewmarcec

This question has plagued all of us entertainment junkies for ages.  Film presents us with a very casual entertainment, and delivers a much more effective impact on story viewing.  I would never try to read Rambo: The Book.  The impact of what the movie brings just couldn’t be matched.  Likewise, I would never want to watch a cerebral novel turned into a movie, just look at Naked Lunch.  This William S. Burroughs novel is totally mind bending, even when you read it you don’t really know what the hell you just read.  However watching the film adaption is just…well I can’t even begin to really encapsulate that experience.

This is one of the normal scenes.

It seems that when there is a book and then a film adaptation, there is a deep line drawn in the sand.  People choose sides and then don’t budge.  The Harry Potter and Twilight fans I think are the most lax on which side they choose.  It seems as though they have reached an equal compromise that both book and film are equally entertaining.  Then again, the fan base on these aren’t as disgruntled and hardcore as some of the larger fantasy based books like Lord of the Rings.

I can see both sides of the story with this argument.  There are books out there that I’ve read where I genuinely love the film adaptation.  For example, let’s take a quick look at Stephen King’s The Shining.


The book is a little on the slow side, but it builds character, just like the character of the hotel.  As you read it, you can almost feel the tension, and every hotel you walk into will seem a little off after you finish reading it.  You keep thinking “if these walls could talk”.

The fear in the novel is very mental.   Is Jack crazy?  Or is he really seeing ghosts?  It makes you question the things you see when you spend a weekend home alone, was that noise in the basement the furnace?  Or is someone breaking in?  It plays with your mental insecurities and escalates those little fears you didn’t think you had.

The movie is a monster entirely of it’s own.  Stanley Kubrick used the novel almost as a jumping point, and twisted it until it was his own creation.  Some of the more notable scenes in the film (the twins in the hallway) aren’t even in the book, and the endings are both completely different.  Both having a powerful effect on you.

Not in the book

The fear in the film is a more subtly obvious terror.  What does that mean?  I mean Kubrick shows you that fear so up front, and so honestly, that we are jaded to it’s presence.  This was the point behind Kubrick’s The Shining.  We’ve seen it all on TV, so we don’t even notice the terror.

Take a step back and look at the main premise of the film.  A man goes crazy and tries to kill his wife.  How is that NOT terrifying on its own?  Most of us though, look at this like its just another humdrum plot point, and we are waiting for ghosts and goblins to jump out of the walls.  With how much death and destruction we are subjected too, it seems these types of actions are almost expected in normal life.  That’s why I mentioned the “we’ve seen it all on TV” statement earlier.

The Donner Party? It’s okay…he saw it on the TV.

Go back, re-watch the film and look at how many lines are pulled from TV shows, or how many times TV is mentioned.  The Simpsons’ Halloween special The Shinning was more accurate than they know.

This big fear difference is one reason why people prefer the book to the movie.  That feeling of intense dread, knowing the one person you love and trust with your life is coming to hurt you is fully explored and analyzed in the book.  This is something the movie can never do.

So where do we draw the line on where we stand to allegiance?  How do we know which side of the fandom line we fall on?  It’s simple, read the book, watch the movie, and see what you prefer.

Recently I finished reading Wizard’s First Rule by Terry Goodkind.  This series was spun into the TV series Legend of the Seeker.  I was a huge fan of the show, it blended a great amount of fantasy with actuality, and had an excellent plot.  However I can safely say that after reading the first book in the series that I will not watch the show ever again.

There were concepts in the book that the TV show had to dumb down for its audiences, and so many plot-lines that they simply discarded, probably due to budget.

That’s the real difference between the two mediums…with a book the vastness of what you create relies only upon your imagination and the readers ability to relate.  With a film it all depends on how deep your pocket book is.

Do you agree?  Which movie to you prefer to it’s book counterpart or vice versa?

Topics: Blog Books Movies Rants | Read more about:

4 Comments to “Book vs Movie – Which Is Better?”

  1. Junk

    Oct 13th, 2010

    I know this is gonna sound crass and Not-Yet-Getting-The-GED of me, but I often like the movies better. Now that isn’t to say that all movies are better than books, that just means I’m a film snob and I like movies.

    However, all in all, I usually like the book better than the movie bastard. HP, Dragonlance, Kick Ass. Damn, now that I think about it, there are few movies I liked as much as the movie. Shit, I’m no longer necessary.

  2. Andrew

    Oct 13th, 2010

    Hey nothing wrong with liking the movies that the books are based on. I find some of them are superior films to original film ideas nowadays.

    Dragonlance f’sho man! That animated movie was HORRIBLE!!!!!

  3. David

    Nov 13th, 2010

    mmm…
    this is the hardest question I could ever ask myself (and I do from time to time). You see, the book is my all time favorite book but the movie is my all time favorite movie. I never tire from them. But their feel is entirely different and fantastic.

    I think what it comes down to is personal investment in either neutralism or the paranormal.

    stephen king’s story likes to hint at a greater force but i think Kubrick’s genius was in putting all of the demons into something factual (Jack Torrence). And from there its almost as if the movie is offering you specters that could either be actual phantoms of the Overlook hotel or just mental projections from outwardly corrupted minds. Either way you perceive it there is genius material.

    John Carpenter said it best…
    “What ever is behind the door is never nearly as terrifying as what you imagine is behind the door”

  4. Andrew

    Nov 15th, 2010

    David,

    Great point with the John Carpenter quote, you are so incredibly right! Of all the films I’ve watched only John Carpenter satisfied my “what’s behind the door” urge with “The Thing”.

    I agree on your points on the Shining as well, it’s absolutely brilliant work, and that it is why it is so many people’s favorite pieces, mine included.

    Thanks for reading the sight and sharing your opinions!

This is the personal website of author Andrew Marcec. Here you'll find excerpts of all his latest works, his daily blog, the serial podcast 'Oasis', and a whole lot more. So feel free to stay a while, read some of his work, and drop Andrew a line when you're done!

  • No public Twitter messages.