We’ve all heard and no doubt partaken in the old “books versus films” arguments, where the majority of us who read a lot tend to side with the notion that books are always better than the film. Or are they?
Well, okay, for the most part they are. I’m certainly not going to try and resist this, because I believe it myself (and today I bought the film of Catch-22, my favourite book…I am a little worried…). But, the question I pose in this post is can film interpretations improve upon books? Have you watched some films that are better than the books, or has this never happened for you – do you instead always prefer the book, no matter what.
To start this discussion, I will admit my thoughts on the matter. Almost always I prefer the book, but one exception to this is (don’t hate me) the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Don’t get me wrong, I love the novels too. But the films were just amazing, so good that I can’t imagine anybody would dare to remake them ever again. For me, these films took everything I loved about the story, and made it slightly better (while also cutting out some of the lengthy descriptions that could bog down the books from time to time).
So, what are your thoughts on this? Are there any film interpretations you prefer to their written counterparts? Or do you prefer books all the way?