Read the novel or watch the movie?

For all the novels of which movies have been made, I prefer watching the movies version only... Its better to watch a movie in 3 hours rather than spend 4-5 days or even longer reading the same story in the book... Movies are much exciting than the text content as well...

If I haven't read the book by the time a movie comes out, I generally prefer to see the movie first and then read the book, because there is so much more detail in the books and so it often makes the story richer to read the book after seeing the story. When I have already read and loved a book and then there is a movie, I just try to remind myself that it's impractical to try to include everything in the movie, and just enjoy it for what it is. There is only one time that I prefered a movie to a book, and that was "The Firm." Otherwise, the books are always better to me.

i haven't finished the book of harry potter so i guess i like to watch the movie.

As I have noticed, most movies are far worse off than the books itself. It doesn't usually reflect the whole book. Well, for one, the movie versions are just too limited. I mean, they only have limited time to show the book's gist. However, I'm so silly. I still like the movies. I find it boring sometimes to read story books and novels due to their flowery contexts. Anyway, I like movies better since it just entertains. Now, I realized that I should not read books anymore before watching a movie. So, I won't expect anything on the silver screen.

I normally read the book before watching the movie. I have much more fun reading a novel when I don't have movie versions of characters in my mind's eye or - worse - already know the ending. I prefer the other way round, because when I watch a film and already know the ending, I will still be interested in how they 'translated' everything from paper to screen: how the characters look, which parts are left out and so on.

I usually like the books better because the movies leave out parts due to time constraints. I also like the way I can make the characters and settings the way I want whereas in a movie the imagination is taken away. Saying that I do love movies and have watched many that have been based on books that I have loved, like the Harry Potter movies. I do like to read the book before seeing the movie whenever possible. What do you like to do first, read or watch?

In my opinion, the book has more details than the movie. Based on my friends who read the harry potter novels, they think it is better to read it than to wtach it, because some of the details were lost. But if you are a bum and too lazy to read better settle for the movie, hhaha...

I have not read Harry Potter series but i have seen its four parts. I have Godfather three times. Its a brilliant piece of fiction by Mario Puzo. I have also seen the Godfather movie by francis Ford Cuppala. I think its a brilliant adaptation of the novel. each and every character in the movie is brilliantly screenplayed in the movie. So thats a fair attempt. I simply enjoyed the movies as much as i have enjoyed the novel.

I think most of the people would vote for Harry Potter. The way i imagined each character was presented the same on the screen. This was the first time i felt imagination comming into reality. Hatsoof to the director.

Because I have been an avid reader since childhood - I would definetley say that most times - the book is better than the movie. Unless you happen to see the movie before reading the book- and feel for that story better. For example, "A Time to Kill", and "The Firm". Although I like the book more in "A Time to Kill"- the ending in the movie "The Firm" is very different the the book- and in my opinion- much better :)

The book is always better than the movie. I've yet to find a movie that surpasses the novel; however, their are some movies I consider equal to the books in their excellence. The Green Mile is a great example. The movie and the book (or books in a series) are both superb.

It seems that the consensus is read the books first then see the movie. I agree. Some writers use alot of what the character is thinking instead of actually speaking. That's not easy to do in a movie unless you want the character talking to himself through the movie. In the book Dreamcatcher by Stephen King, large chunks of the book took place in one of the characters mind. I wondered how they would be able to put that on the movie screen, but they did a fairly good job of it. It was such a unique way of looking at the mind and memories that it seemed better suited to a novel than movie.

I read the novel at first and then go watch the movie :P And almost everytime the book is better than a movie, simply because it has no time restrictions, it can have it's own pace. I know some films like "Lord of the Rings" are looong, but still it's shortened version of the original. Basically the movies that are based on some stories are made to popularize the story itself.

I prefer watching the movie.It is summary of what is written on the novel and I tend to appreciate it much because I am more of a visual person.