You know what one of my biggest pet peeves is? When after reading a awesome book, I decide to watch the movie, which is hardly ANYTHING like the book. Then I spend most of the movie grinding my teeth and growling whenever the actors do something that contradicts the book. One of the best examples would be the book Eragon. Now this is one of my favorite books, I think Christopher Paolini is a genius (He was a homeshooler by the way), but the movie was an utter disgrace. The funny thing is though, I probably would of liked the movie (despite the bad acting), if I had never read the book. So it makes me wonder, is it better to read the book, or watch the movie first?
If you read the book first, and the movie doesn't follow the book, you will be angry at the people who made the movie, and you won't have a very fun time at all. (Except if you enjoy pointing out the numerous errors in the movie. Which I kind of do.)
If you watch the movie first, you will probably enjoy the movie, but when you read the book you can't imagine what the characters look like. They are already set in stone in your mind. Plus you will get mad that the book wasn't what you were expecting.
So I think the best thing would be if the director followed the book as closely as possible. I understand that the movie has to be a little different. And in the case of books like Eragon or Lord of The Rings the movie can't be quite as long as the book.
But in Eragon they rushed through several chapters in a couple of minutes. You can't enjoy a plot like that when everything is happening so fast.
Everyone I have met so far has agreed with me, directors really should pay more attention to the finer details of the book. Then everyone is happy. So, do you agree, or disagree? Please comment and give me your opinion
No comments:
Post a Comment