What do you think causes some people to argue about movies versus the books they are based on?

[freelancermaria]

Some people usually debate the differences between movies and the books they are based on. This discontent usually takes place when viewers have read the books and feel that the movie lacks important details. I believe both have their strengths: movies can visually convey details and feelings, while books provide a more in-depth experience. What can you say?

 

[kit_hung]

I’ve found myself in this same debate a few times! There was a time when I read a book and loved every page, and then I watched the movie and felt like something was missing. But still, I can’t ignore the power of images and sound in a movie.

Books give us the opportunity to enter the minds of the characters, to understand their feelings in depth. Movies, on the other hand, bring reality through visuals and audio, and sometimes add emotion through music and scenery.

So, rather than making too many comparisons, perhaps it’s better to see them as two different ways of telling a story. Each has its own beauty, and if we enjoy them from that perspective, we can have a more unique experience.

 

[Bigshow]

If a movie is based in a true life story it must be and i repeat be as it is we really don't need to look for endings it must give us that content

 

[freelancermaria]

Yes, each has its own strengths and beauty, and I appreciate both. Movies can bring stories to life, while books provide a more in-depth experience.

 

[eLdavis]

While in most cases it is impossible to actually adapt exactly everything from the books, most people compare and complain because these movies tend to change too much, or even end up removing important aspects of the book.