"IT ROTS THE SENSE IN THE HEAD!
IT KILLS IMAGINATION DEAD!
IT CLOGS AND CLUTTERS UP THE MIND!
IT MAKES A CHILD SO DULL AND BLIND!"
Yes, with caps lock. Granted, he was talking about children, but is it all that bad? Is it a better idea to read only the novel? Or maybe we should just watch the film and be done with it in a couple of hours. Of course, this is all my opinion, and it would be interesting to know what you lot also think. After you read the article, please feel free to leave a comment down below.
Novels that have become films
The list of novels that have been made into films is literally (well, perhaps not ‘literally’. Maybe ‘practically’) endless. Lord of the Rings, the Fault In Our Stars, Harry Potter, Hitchhiker's; I’m sure you know more than I do. The point is, the general consensus, at least that I’ve heard, is that the novel is always better than the film.
Surely we can’t judge films by the same criteria we judge novels! Let’s take a look at novels for a second. Books have to have a ‘hook’, a catchy opening to ensure we’re grabbed by it to keep reading. The only films that have to have catchy openings are ones on TV - if you’re sat in the cinema, then you are there until that film ends. I suppose you could walk out if you don’t like it, but you’re not getting your money back, and I like getting my money’s worth (hey, I’m British). Contrastingly, films need good advertisement, such as adverts, posters, trailers, to ensure you actually go to watch it, and personally I have never seen a book advert on TV.
So when someone has read the novel and then watched the film and decided to preach the obviously true belief that the novel is “way better than that rubbish film,” make sure you’re a little skeptical. They may just naturally enjoy novels more than they do films, or have a strong dislike for films in general. Or they may not like you, and tell you to go and see a really bad film, or tell you not to go and see a really good one, but that all depends upon who you are and how nice you are to other people (let's hope you don't fall under that criteria then - sorry!).
Of course, opinions can be influenced by what you grew up with (I personally hate the new look of Bob the Builder since they changed him, but that may be just me), like if you grew up with the 1989 Batman, then the Dark Knight trilogy may be a little too much for you. Applying the same principle, if you grew up reading the Lord of the Rings, and then you decided to watch the films in the early 2000s, you may find yourself hating them for not making Frodo be a bit shorter, or what have you. Same with the Terry Pratchett novels. I loved reading them, it was a marvellous experience being absorbed into the DiscWorld. When I watched the film, I also enjoyed it, just not as much as the novel. I don’t know if that speaks more about the quality of the movie or whether I just enjoy movies less.
Some amazingly deep thinkers have conjured up the solution to read the novel and watch the film. But which do you do first?
Read the novel or watch the film FIRST?
Reading the novel is generally perceived as a more intellectual task than popping a DVD on. The only reason I can see for this is you actually have to process words. But, fact of the matter is, these days films have a much wider reach. It’s a group activity, whereas reading a novel is very much a solo experience. Even book meetups are just discussing the novel, not even reading it together!
The opinion of most people (at least the loudest people on the internet) is that you must read the novel first! YOU MUST YOU MUST YOU MUST. The argument is as follows - if you have watched the film and then you decide to read the novel, all the way throughout you will be picturing the character as perceived in the film.
The wonderful and amazing Anna, who co-writes this blog (I’m not in a relationship with myself I’ll have you know) read the Fault in our Stars way before the film even began production. The way she conceptualised Hazel Grace had black and red hair, and if you’ve seen the film then you’ll know it’s just brown.
However, I watched the film, with Anna no less, and I have not read the novel (although I want to)! People said to me that if I did such a thing, then I would definitely be completely unable to enjoy the story. Such people must obviously have been wrong, as I thoroughly enjoyed it.
Films that have become novels
“Well well well Aaron,” I hear you say. “Now what about novels that start out as films? This is a whole different matter. The novelisation of a film can definitely be much worse than the film itself compared to novels that become films. The Matrix is a prime example. The film was enjoyable (well, good at least), but reading the novel just makes you wish you were eating that gloop instead...
There is one interesting example I have to talk about, which I even grew up with, and that is the matter of Star Wars. When I was a child, they were just releasing Episodes I, II, and III, but my love for the original trilogy was strong. I thought they were amazing films (I still watch them every few months), but the novelisations of the films were… Not appealing, to say the least. All they did was describe the events in the film without any extra characterisation, feelings, or anything else we could expect from a novel that we don’t get in a film. We may as well have been reading the script.
But it’s the other Star Wars novels where my heart lies. The Jedi Search series, for example, is part of the Expanded Universe of Star Wars, and it tells the events which take place after Return of the Jedi. Luke now runs a Jedi Academy, and Mara Jade turns up and there’s the Solo children and the Skywalker and children and yeah. Now, even though it technically isn’t a novelisation of a specific film, just the franchise, does it still count in this argument? To be honest, I don’t think anybody knows any more.
So Aaron? What's your verdict? Where did you go with this article?!
In the end, it may be the skill of either the author, or the actors or director that determines whether you prefer the film or the novelisation. I prefer the Lord of the Rings film to the novel, but I favour the Hitchhiker’s Guide novels over the films. It’s all a matter of preference, and has nothing to do with novels or films as a whole.
So this whole article was pointless. Well, thank you for taking the time to read it. And if you skipped to the end, I hope you don’t do that with the novels you read.
At least you can’t do that with films in the cinema.
The list of novels that have been made into films is literally (well, perhaps not ‘literally’. Maybe ‘practically’) endless. Lord of the Rings, the Fault In Our Stars, Harry Potter, Hitchhiker's; I’m sure you know more than I do. The point is, the general consensus, at least that I’ve heard, is that the novel is always better than the film.
Surely we can’t judge films by the same criteria we judge novels! Let’s take a look at novels for a second. Books have to have a ‘hook’, a catchy opening to ensure we’re grabbed by it to keep reading. The only films that have to have catchy openings are ones on TV - if you’re sat in the cinema, then you are there until that film ends. I suppose you could walk out if you don’t like it, but you’re not getting your money back, and I like getting my money’s worth (hey, I’m British). Contrastingly, films need good advertisement, such as adverts, posters, trailers, to ensure you actually go to watch it, and personally I have never seen a book advert on TV.
So when someone has read the novel and then watched the film and decided to preach the obviously true belief that the novel is “way better than that rubbish film,” make sure you’re a little skeptical. They may just naturally enjoy novels more than they do films, or have a strong dislike for films in general. Or they may not like you, and tell you to go and see a really bad film, or tell you not to go and see a really good one, but that all depends upon who you are and how nice you are to other people (let's hope you don't fall under that criteria then - sorry!).
Of course, opinions can be influenced by what you grew up with (I personally hate the new look of Bob the Builder since they changed him, but that may be just me), like if you grew up with the 1989 Batman, then the Dark Knight trilogy may be a little too much for you. Applying the same principle, if you grew up reading the Lord of the Rings, and then you decided to watch the films in the early 2000s, you may find yourself hating them for not making Frodo be a bit shorter, or what have you. Same with the Terry Pratchett novels. I loved reading them, it was a marvellous experience being absorbed into the DiscWorld. When I watched the film, I also enjoyed it, just not as much as the novel. I don’t know if that speaks more about the quality of the movie or whether I just enjoy movies less.
Some amazingly deep thinkers have conjured up the solution to read the novel and watch the film. But which do you do first?
Read the novel or watch the film FIRST?
Reading the novel is generally perceived as a more intellectual task than popping a DVD on. The only reason I can see for this is you actually have to process words. But, fact of the matter is, these days films have a much wider reach. It’s a group activity, whereas reading a novel is very much a solo experience. Even book meetups are just discussing the novel, not even reading it together!
The opinion of most people (at least the loudest people on the internet) is that you must read the novel first! YOU MUST YOU MUST YOU MUST. The argument is as follows - if you have watched the film and then you decide to read the novel, all the way throughout you will be picturing the character as perceived in the film.
The wonderful and amazing Anna, who co-writes this blog (I’m not in a relationship with myself I’ll have you know) read the Fault in our Stars way before the film even began production. The way she conceptualised Hazel Grace had black and red hair, and if you’ve seen the film then you’ll know it’s just brown.
However, I watched the film, with Anna no less, and I have not read the novel (although I want to)! People said to me that if I did such a thing, then I would definitely be completely unable to enjoy the story. Such people must obviously have been wrong, as I thoroughly enjoyed it.
Films that have become novels
“Well well well Aaron,” I hear you say. “Now what about novels that start out as films? This is a whole different matter. The novelisation of a film can definitely be much worse than the film itself compared to novels that become films. The Matrix is a prime example. The film was enjoyable (well, good at least), but reading the novel just makes you wish you were eating that gloop instead...
There is one interesting example I have to talk about, which I even grew up with, and that is the matter of Star Wars. When I was a child, they were just releasing Episodes I, II, and III, but my love for the original trilogy was strong. I thought they were amazing films (I still watch them every few months), but the novelisations of the films were… Not appealing, to say the least. All they did was describe the events in the film without any extra characterisation, feelings, or anything else we could expect from a novel that we don’t get in a film. We may as well have been reading the script.
But it’s the other Star Wars novels where my heart lies. The Jedi Search series, for example, is part of the Expanded Universe of Star Wars, and it tells the events which take place after Return of the Jedi. Luke now runs a Jedi Academy, and Mara Jade turns up and there’s the Solo children and the Skywalker and children and yeah. Now, even though it technically isn’t a novelisation of a specific film, just the franchise, does it still count in this argument? To be honest, I don’t think anybody knows any more.
So Aaron? What's your verdict? Where did you go with this article?!
In the end, it may be the skill of either the author, or the actors or director that determines whether you prefer the film or the novelisation. I prefer the Lord of the Rings film to the novel, but I favour the Hitchhiker’s Guide novels over the films. It’s all a matter of preference, and has nothing to do with novels or films as a whole.
So this whole article was pointless. Well, thank you for taking the time to read it. And if you skipped to the end, I hope you don’t do that with the novels you read.
At least you can’t do that with films in the cinema.
No comments:
Post a Comment