I am one of the few of my friends that enjoys reading on the side. My stepfather is one of the biggest reasons why I have enjoyed reading as much as I do. He constantly is reading and looking up to him as a child, I followed his actions. With anyone that I talk to about books vs. movies, I can not recall any movie that was better than the book. Anytime a book-made-into-a-movie comes out, this question is often risen and I have never heard anyone say that the movie was better than the book. Can anyone give an example of a movie better than a book? I know I can't.
The Ten Commandments, it shat on the book. Edit: I am actually not even being snide. When you are a kid the bible is just the bible, hell I possibly even resented it but damn if that movie didn't bring that shit to life.
Are you serious? I think films of the last 20 years are largely superior to past works, but comparing dialogue and narrative in popular films of that era versus those of today is ridiculous. You might as well be comparing serious literature to lolcat blogs...oh wait, that's what some of the people in this topic have been doing... Just off the top of my head, among the highest-grossing blockbusters of the day, there was 12 Angry Men Bridge on the River Kwai A Face in the Crowd The Ten Commandments Gone with the Wind Adjusted for inflation, these films made anywhere from about $400 million dollars to 1.5 billion dollars domestically. Go ahead and find me any mega-blockbuster now that was as story-driven, dialogue-heavy, or used comparably advanced language. Edit Except there was a huge horror movie craze from 1930-1960, and a major science fiction period from about 1950-1970. So these films were already around and popular, but were nevertheless not as financially successful as the movies with great story and dialogue. The conclusion is a simple one.
While on a long drive with two friends last week we talked about a lot of things. Sex for a few hours, but then me and the other male in the car talked about religion (more a discussion of things than any sort of actual argument, which is nice) and current events and so forth. The female, who happens to own a $400 Louis Vuitton purse, said that we made her feel stupid and commented that she should have paid more attention in school to keep up with us. Not that I was surprised that she wasn't as up on things as me and the other guy, but I sure as hell didn't learn about the finer and controversial points of the history of religions from my Catholic high school teachers. And that's another thing I just won't get. You could sell the exact same purse for $50 without the LV logo, and nobody would so much as look twice at it. But charge a few hundred dollars and put an ostentatious logo there and people won't stop themselves. Better known as a Veblen good: <a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good</a> There's another variety of stupidity that pops up whenever my classmates ask questions during a lecture on anything related to sex and genitalia, but that's a story for another day.
Come on, it's rare, but it's not that rare. Some obvious ones: - Jaws - The Shawshank Redemption - Silence of the Lambs - Fight Club - The Godfather - Stand by Me ---------------------------------------------- - Schindler's list - Psycho - Forrest Gump - Blade Runner - Gone with the Wind The first group are the books I can vouch for, the others just pertain to a general consensus. Hell, McCarthy is my favorite author and I might even add No Country For Old Men to that list. If you want to get nit picky you can maybe pick a couple of those books (though I doubt it), but the point easily stands.
Conversation with a buddy on a smoke break at work today, with about 3-4 people around: Me: What are you gonna do this weekend? Buddy: The wife has been on my case to do yardwork. It's not too bad but she seems to think it's like Miss Havisham's. Me: haha suckerrr! Wait...did you really just reference Dickens? Nearby people: Who the hell is that? cynismus, what the hell is he talking about? Maybe I'm being a bit of a snob here, but wasn't Great Expectations a book that damn near everyone had to read in high school or college? We work in an office that employs nearly all college graduates. I am pretty sure that the people around us all went to college, which means they went to high school as well, and that's when I read that book.
Personally I’m supportive of a stupider Gen Emodouche, I mean Y. Makes it easier to soar like an eagle when you’re flying with turkeys. Off topic: Why's current male teen fashion geared to make the kids look as weak, ugly and poor as possible, what's the upside?
My guess is that most of these teens are from relatively well off or affluent families and this fashion is an attempt to gain some "street credibility" and an element of "authenticity" , all of which is artifical and bullshit of course. On the flip side, genuinely poor kids probably desire to be able to dress in cool "label" or "brand" clothes so that they look affluent , hip or fashionable and not just , well , poor.
Fuck bothering 'em, they just make me look manlier. Regarding books, I used to read a whole lot during high school. My best classes were English classes and I had a great AP English teacher. I'm not saying I was great at literary analysis and writing about it, but I really enjoyed it. I got very tired of reading books after I started college because of textbooks that I hated. If I couldn't stand the the subjects, I hated being forced to pore over them in a bland textbook. I have, however started reading more because of the extra time on my hands that corresponds with the arrival of summer. Picked up the always enjoyable Steinbeck and Hemingway novels. Interestingly enough, I can't get my hands on enough informative books that are within my interest and lucrative hobbies.
Some of these movies I have seen and loved (The Godfather, Psycho, Fight Club, Silence of the Lambs, etc. and ironically enough I was at Barnes and Noble today and saw the book, Fight Club). Although, some I actually knew were books before movies and didn't find out that they were books before movies until much later. And the general society probably does not know that most of these infamous movies were books before they became the popular blockbuster hits they are today. I am just curious as to how many of the people in the population would know that movies like the ones you listed were books before. I am also now much more interested in reading some of these books and watch the movies again to follow you on your validity.
You would think so, but you also seem to forget the amazing amount of slackers that use the "life-saving" Sparknotes and Cliffnotes. There is also the good old fashion cheating off a student's test and copying off of other kids' homeworks. Kids want to get the grade, but not make an effort to do so. Also, curriculum has changed in some high schools. Some are still using classic novels to read but teachers are now starting to use some more modern novels to read in class. The Kite Runner is one that is read often in high school now that was written in 2004. Teachers are trying to grab student's attention by giving them a book to read that is more modern but still has depth to it. Even then, technology has given us so many ways to cut corners that that may not even help.
Have you read fight club? I don't know anyone who would argue the movie was better. The rest I wouldn't call locks but agree based on personal taste the movie could be viewed as better; however again far from locks. The only locks I would give you are Jaws and Blade Runner (I haven't read Psycho). Also anyone who thinks the movie Schindlers List was better than the book is an idiot.
*Raises hand* Pitt's performance raises the level of the movie above the book. What more, the majority of people I know who have read the book considered the movie to be superior. From what I've heard/read, I've always been under the impression that this is general consensus. The majority of such lists online seem to contain Fight Club. And I don't see how The Godfather, roundly considered to be one of the greatest films ever made, isn't a "lock." I enjoyed Puzo's works, but I don't think they're even really considered to be classics, let alone met with the type of acclaim that the films are. I've heard people throw LoTR onto such lists, and that seems reasonable-but-arguable to me (personally didn't care too much for the books, but they are classics after all). Ben-Hur and The Graduate are also another common nominees, but I haven't read either. The Wizard of Oz seems like a lock. Short answer, no. At least not in American schools. I know the only Dickens I had to read was Tale of Two Cities in eighth grade. Even the AP Literature class I took that focused on British works didn't include anything by him. Not really a "difficulty" thing, more just a matter of what is/isn't on the curriculum for particular teachers.
This may not count, because it's a graphic novel and it's just my opinion I haven't read anything on it, but Kick-Ass the movie was MUCH better than Kick-Ass the GN. Somehow the movie managed to just have a lot more depth to it than the book, the characters were far less annoying, and there were scenes fleshed out in the movie that were glossed over in the book but NOT the other way around.
I don't get the umbrage at people not reading. Literacy, or the move towards mass literacy, is a fairly new invention, roughly around the 20th Century in America. I won't comment as to people taking pride in not reading, but the fact of the matter is that reading books is not in the least necessary anymore. It's outdated. Now, I read voraciously, but that's for pleasure. With the amount of visual media that is present in today's world, you can make an excellent argument that reading a book is a non-economical use of your time. I haven't read all the responses in this thread, so if this is redundant, my apologies.
If the end goal is learning, I don't disagree. In terms of development and the shaping of the mind the jury is out for me. I don't know enough to definitively say but I would imagine the reading of fiction plays at least some part in a solid development.
This would be a great idea for a topic. I know you mentioned not having read it, but there is no way Gone with the Wind is "obviously" better in its film version. The movie was very good, and for its time, certainly great, but the book is much better. The level of detail, characterization of the families and individuals before the War, and overall depth, humor, and excitement of the novel is significantly greater. Every single scene from the movie can be found in the book, but there are many great or better scenes in the book that the film doesn't have. (Due to obvious time constraints) Also, while it's far more debatable, I wouldn't call the films of "The Godfather" clearly better than the book. The movies were excellent, but the novel was outstanding, and in my mind, even better.
I think we are off topic in this but I'll bite. I thought fight club was a better movie, Pitt brought Tyler to life. Also the random "I am Ted's boiling tumor" lines in the book were kind of distracting. Friday Night Lights was a better movie than a book. The book dealt way too much with the city of Odessa Texas, while the movie focused on football. To say you can never find an example of a movie being better than a book is silly, their are always examples. Truth be told MOST of the time the book is better.