Yet another book related question

last month

A respected author writes a highly successful novel set in the present day, featuring ordinary people living plausible lives with no sci-fi, speculative, or contrived elements. Let's say it's a suspense story. The book tops bestseller lists for months and is later adapted into a critically acclaimed, box-office hit film.

You can only "do" one, see the movie or read the book. Not both.

I'd choose the book every time. A well-received novel by a recognized author is enough to interest me on its own. I rarely discuss books with friends, so I don't read them in time to join anticipated conversations simply because it's a topical subject. Heavy media attention tends to make me less interested rather than more. My reading choices are generally driven by personal preference, not popularity or trends.

By necessity, movies based on a book need to extract story elements and leave things out because of limited space within the time constraints of a feature film.

How about you, which would you be more likely to choose?

Featured Answer

KW PNW Z8

last month

last modified: last month

If I could do only one, hands down it’s the book. My imagination and the finite details in the written story cannot be matched by any movie version. Having answered the question asked, I’ll add that often my having read the book determines whether or not I’ll also see a movie made of it. An older example of that is ”The Help” by Kathryn Stockett. I both listened to the audio book & then read the book before I saw the movie. In this particular movie, the actors were able to add detail and flavor that my imagination couldn’t ’see’ because I’ve never lived in the deep south.

Sort by:Oldest

Comments (16)

LoneJack Zn 6a, KC
last month
neither
Elmer J Fudd thanked LoneJack Zn 6a, KC
Offie Myffy
last month
The book.

Based on personal experience with having read books then seen the movie, only one film adaptation was (in my opinion) better than the book: Christine by Stephen King.
Elmer J Fudd thanked Offie Myffy
Related Discussions
Yet Another Property Line Question
Q
Comments (28)
A neighbor has 4 silver maples on the property line. When a branch falls, it gets sent over the line to the owners side. The male neighbor that lives on the other side of the property line isn't very nice. I am okay with that, but the female is nice enough to wave. I think that the Mrs. planted these silver maples on the property line, possibly, without telling Mr. Nastyface, no-wave. Making him think Our family planted them. When branches fall, if I can't safely run them over. If they are substancial, I pitch them over to the side of the tree owners side. I wouldn't think he was mean, but once I was going to wave and he looked at me, and I held the look, and was seconds from the wave and he made a sour- a**ed face at me. His expression was saying, "W@hat!!!? Most peeps around my neighborhood wave even if they don't know you, if you wave they wave back. He accused my neighbor next to me of stealing soil. We both bought a few buckets from another neighbor delivered by bobcat scoop-ful in broad daylight. Sorry if anyone lost interest in the post by now, but, some neighbors can be hard to agree with, I am glad this isn't a planned community with the rules of a -- I forget the initials Home --whatever it is. Even those Duck Dynasty guys have to pay to live in a neighborhood that tells them what to do. I would never (couldn't afford to) live in a fancy place that tells you what you can and can't do on your land you pay taxes on. The nerve of that is really something.
...See More
Yet another question....
Q
Comments (3)
But is also says, it is not accepted. I found it finally in the back of a book, the spelling is different. Is it or not accepted. is there a picture, I can't find where it is accepted Helli. I found it listed way in back of a book of N.E. Brown's monograph hidden on page 80-81 under synonyms Salmia spicata, Cav. Sp. Ehrenergii. Also S. Jacquinii N.E. Brown, same book page 81 tiny letter again spicata.Haw. under S. Intermedia Are any of these right? What is your source Helli? Halli, just found it, it a very old name that is not in use anymore. At least I found it and now I'm satisfied. I just don't date back that far. it is listed as a synonym of hyacinthoides. Thanks, I feel better now. Norma
...See More
Another set of pruning-related questions
Q
Comments (14)
Hi Anthony - I'm glad to hear that so many of them survived. I know you were worried there for a bit that you'd have few viable plants this year. Guess they are tougher then we give them credit for, tight? ;) Cagers often say that they don't prune and they get lots of production. QUESTION: Does this have many fruits ripening at the same time, are the fruits smaller that typical fruits for the variety? More pounds of smaller tomatoes is not something that I want. Hope it's alright if I restrict myself to just this part. As you probably know, I'm a cager and don't prune. But this year I also set up a Florida weave row to try and for comparison. Same varieties in each - Stupice, Bloody Butcher, Brandy Boy, Opalka, Black Cherry, Tappy's Heritage, Super Marmande, Marianna's Peace, and Sweet Cluster. We are eating the Stupice, B. Butcher and a couple of S. Cluster so far. I pruned all of them up to the first fruit cluster and then stopped on the caged ones but pruned the FW row to 3 stems each. Right now they both have just about the same number of fruit +/- a couple, with the exception of the Opalkas, Black Cherry, and the Sweet Clusters. The caged plants of those varieties are at least 18 inches taller and have 1/2 again more green fruit than the pruned ones do. On all the plants the fruit size is the same to the naked eye - I didn't dig out the calipers. ;) The caged ones are ripening from the lowest cluster up - same as the pruned ones - no faster, no slower so far. Don't know if this helps or not? But so far the only real advantage I can see is that the pruned plants are going to be a lot easier to pick the fruit on but I am also worried that I'm going to have more sun scald on them and less production. Time will tell. Hope this is of some help. Dave
...See More
ANOTHER fertilizing-related question...
Q
Comments (31)
The only reason I disagree with some of Farkee's (& similarly Carolyn's) recommendations is because those are typical recommendations for Ag type growers growing field rows of DETERMINATES, and that is often great for DETERMINATES, plus using organics which take a long time to become available to the plant--sometimes too long... I feel INDETERMINATES have a more constant need than determinates, since the are continuing to produce every day until killed by frost. (Here's an analogy I use easy to understand: You don't skip feeding your kids certain days or years of their lives, nor give them a 10 lb bag of food when they are 5 & come back & give them 20lbs again when they are 13, why would you want to only feed an Indeterminate tomato plants 2-3x in THEIR lifespan?) My best method/result with indeterminates is "slow & steady wins the race." I use a fertilizer injector with a hi-P fert early (May-June-July) and a balanced fert with slightly higher K (15-15-18 w/micros, though M-G for Tomatoes works great too) late July thru early September, all at the lowest possible settings. Anthony, with the CAN$ worth more now you can get a cheap injector for under $50 for next year. Fill it up with a Bloom Booster in May (15-30-15, 10-52-8, etc) and have it on a timer for about 30-40 minutes per day on drip irrigation (1gph emitters) The injector is adjustable (unlike the cheap Hoze-On mixers) and I'd run it once at a regular amount and then set it to trickle mode after that. Do that thru mid-July & then switch to M-G for Tomatoes (I use Plantex, a Canadian brand, "Soilless 15-15-18 w/micros", that I buy in 25lb bags.) You'll have loads of maters all season long, and big ones too, but indet. plants will be a managable 6-7ft tall. EVERY time you water them they will be fed tiny amounts. Depending on how many plants, if you use the Plantex, the bag will last you 2-5 years or more. Hope this helps. MaterMark
...See More
Elmer J Fudd
Original Author
last month
No entiendo, lonejack. Are you saying you don't go to movies and don't read books?
LoneJack Zn 6a, KC
last month
No to movies in theaters and I very rarely read books.
Elmer J Fudd thanked LoneJack Zn 6a, KC
stacey_mb
last month
Definitely read the book first, and perhaps not even see the movie. I was reminded again how difficult it is to translate the complexity of a book into a movie when seeing the film Still Alice. I loved the book which is a portrait of a women experiencing dementia but the movie was pretty tepid in comparison.
Elmer J Fudd thanked stacey_mb
lily316
last month
Probably the book. The thriller book I just read could not have been more riveting in a movie.
Elmer J Fudd thanked lily316
cyn427 (z. 7, N. VA)
last month
Definitely the book. The only movie I have seen that I think was a very good adaptation of the book is To Kill a Mockingbird with Gregory Peck. Of course, I thought I would like him to be my father back then and later I thought I should try to be the kind of parent he was in that.
Elmer J Fudd thanked cyn427 (z. 7, N. VA)
Patriciae
last month
The book. It seems to me movie makers simply use the title and the names of characters and then make the rest up. Creative license and expressing themselves or some such nonsense.
Elmer J Fudd thanked Patriciae
bpath
last month
It depends on the author. I used to read Tom Clancy and saw a few of the movies, and I much preferred the movies. Clancy did a lot of research and included it all in the novels. The movies told the story.

Stacey, interesting about Still Alice. I didn’t read the book but the movie was scary.
Elmer J Fudd thanked bpath
donna_loomis
last month
Book for sure.
Elmer J Fudd thanked donna_loomis
dedtired
last month
Most times, the book, however the movie version of Brooklyn was better than the book.
Elmer J Fudd thanked dedtired
Fun2BHere
last month
The book. I see very few movie adaptations and, to go further, I avoid most serial television shows based on book characters.
Elmer J Fudd thanked Fun2BHere
laceyvail 6A, WV
last month
Always the book. The only movie I ever saw that I liked better than the book was The Secret of Roan Inish. Many of you know that I am a mad fan of Tolkien and have read The Lord of the Rings over 20 times. But I have never seen the movies and don't intend to. When it was on Netflix, I did decide to try it. Twenty minutes into it, I turned it off. However good others thought it was, however much it has been praised, it simply was not Tolkien or his vision.
Elmer J Fudd thanked laceyvail 6A, WV
rob333 (zone 7b)
last month
last modified: last month
The movie version of The Horse Whisperer was far better. I hated the book's ending. That said, I always do both. Heck, I cast my book characters with movie stars when reading it. I hear it in their voices, and picture their faces. I'd be great at casting movies.
Elmer J Fudd thanked rob333 (zone 7b)
Alisande
last month
Definitely the book. That would have been my answer as far back as I can remember, but today I can add that the older I get, the less interested I am in movies. I'm fonder of streaming series, especially ones I get attached to, like Bosch, and hate to see end. I still like books though.
Elmer J Fudd thanked Alisande

Yet another book related question

KW PNW Z8

Comments (16)

LoneJack Zn 6a, KC

Offie Myffy

Related Discussions

Elmer J Fudd
Original Author

LoneJack Zn 6a, KC

stacey_mb

lily316

cyn427 (z. 7, N. VA)

Patriciae

bpath

donna_loomis

dedtired

Fun2BHere

laceyvail 6A, WV

rob333 (zone 7b)

Alisande

COMPANY

BUSINESS SERVICES

GET HELP

CONNECT WITH US

Yet another book related question

Comments (16)

Related Discussions

Elmer J FuddOriginal Author

COMPANY

BUSINESS SERVICES

GET HELP

CONNECT WITH US

Elmer J Fudd
Original Author