Books vs. Movies vs. Video games
Never judge a book by its movie.
J. W. Eagan
In the old days (say, before 1980), things were simpler. Someone wrote a book. If the idea was good and would translate well, then it might be made into a movie. Now, the ideas come from all different directions and move different ways - movies are made and then books written and video games created. Or a video game does well and then gets turned into a movie and books. Or a book becomes a movie and the movie inspires a video game.....
Here is what I think:
1) The book is always better than the movie (or the video game). But read the book first and then see the movie.
2) Rule #1 applies IF the book was created first. For books that were written after a movie or after a video game are often as weak as the movie merchandise that comes in a McDonald's Happy Meal. But there are a few exceptions to this rule. (I have been told to read the books inspired by the game 'Halo' and they are on my future reading list....)
3) A good book does not always equal a good movie or a good video game. But a weak book generally does translate into a poor movie or video game.
Best movies made from books?
The "Lord of the Rings" movies. (of course)
The Harry Potter movies are very faithful to the books, but until the 4th one they were pretty slow movies.
Worst book adaptation?
The first 'Dune' movie. (with Sting.) I was so mad when I walked out of that theater. The sci-fi channel mini-series is light years better.
If you can think of any more really good or really poor book adaptations please post them in a reply. Also if there are lists on the web somewhere of best and worst book adaptations (I have looked a little) then post them in a reply and let me know.
The book is still the higher form of art.
And what about video games? The "Icewind Dale" books became a game. "Halo" is a game that became books and is becoming a movie (with Peter Jackson producing). Raymond Fiest wrote a book that was directly tied to a computer game a few years ago, but the result was both were weak.
J. W. Eagan
In the old days (say, before 1980), things were simpler. Someone wrote a book. If the idea was good and would translate well, then it might be made into a movie. Now, the ideas come from all different directions and move different ways - movies are made and then books written and video games created. Or a video game does well and then gets turned into a movie and books. Or a book becomes a movie and the movie inspires a video game.....
Here is what I think:
1) The book is always better than the movie (or the video game). But read the book first and then see the movie.
2) Rule #1 applies IF the book was created first. For books that were written after a movie or after a video game are often as weak as the movie merchandise that comes in a McDonald's Happy Meal. But there are a few exceptions to this rule. (I have been told to read the books inspired by the game 'Halo' and they are on my future reading list....)
3) A good book does not always equal a good movie or a good video game. But a weak book generally does translate into a poor movie or video game.
Best movies made from books?
The "Lord of the Rings" movies. (of course)
The Harry Potter movies are very faithful to the books, but until the 4th one they were pretty slow movies.
Worst book adaptation?
The first 'Dune' movie. (with Sting.) I was so mad when I walked out of that theater. The sci-fi channel mini-series is light years better.
If you can think of any more really good or really poor book adaptations please post them in a reply. Also if there are lists on the web somewhere of best and worst book adaptations (I have looked a little) then post them in a reply and let me know.
The book is still the higher form of art.
And what about video games? The "Icewind Dale" books became a game. "Halo" is a game that became books and is becoming a movie (with Peter Jackson producing). Raymond Fiest wrote a book that was directly tied to a computer game a few years ago, but the result was both were weak.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home