Books and films both tell stories, but what we want from a book can be different from what we want from a movie. Is this true for you? If so, what’s the difference between a book and a movie?
It’s definitely true for me. Books and movies convey things in very different ways. Movies can be more subtle – conveying emotion and expression through a glance or a touch, or using a beautiful landscape to convey location. Books have to be more descriptive and can thus be boring or fail to evoke a particular place. Books, however, also allow us to place our own stamp on a particular story and bring our own experiences to the table, more so because characters usually remain faceless. They allow us to go deeper and become friends in our minds with characters we love. There is no fourth wall, and there is in the movies just as there is on the stage. They also can give a much deeper view of character and how people’s minds work. In my opinion, there can be much more to a book than there is to a movie. Of course, I do love movies, but most of them by their very length and nature must omit my favorite qualities – deep complexity, deeper storytelling, and in-depth character insight. It’s much harder to get these things from a screen than it is from the written word.
Not surprisingly, when I’ve seen a movie derived from a book, I almost always enjoy the book more, even if I read the book after seeing the film. At the moment I can’t actually think of any exceptions, though there are some, I’m certain of it. I understand that things must be cut out and I do often enjoy seeing a favorite story enacted on screen, but nothing compares to sitting down and reading through a book.
Recent Comments