Should you read the book before seeing the film?? Time Traveler's Wife
By oldchem1
@oldchem1 (8132)
June 15, 2010 1:26pm CST
How many times have you been disappointed when you have read a book and then watched the film adaption of it.
On this occassion I ma thinking about the book/film - The Time Traveler's Wife by Audrey Niffenegger.
In this case I Right, I saw the film before I read the book.
Did I do it the right way round?
I think that I did.
Which was the best? In my opinion definitely the book, although I did enjoy the film.
My daughter introduced me to both the book and film, after her having her head buried in the book all through her recent visit; we went to the cinema together to watch it and then she passed on her book to me.
Had I not had my daughter's impressions thrust at me constantly about this book (and she does read a LOT of books), I don't know if I would have thought of reading it. It sounds, on face value, rather too 'sci-fi' for my liking, but this is no 'Dr Who' or H. G. Wells type time traveller.
Although I'm not into the romantic novel field either, this book is quite possibly one of the most inimitable and striking love stories I have read, and certainly of the most unforgettable.
So what did I think of the book?
Well, personally I thought that this was a wonderful book and that Audrey Niffenegger is a really gifted writer, she took a difficult situation (to say the least) and made it both humorous and tragic at the same time. The story seemed to flow wonderfully through the complicated timeline. (There were just a couple of times that I had to read back a page or so to make sure I had got the facts right) I thought that all the characters were wonderful, even the minor ones were clearly written and could have great stories of their own. I thought that the way she portrayed Henry and Claire's relationship with no trappings was wonderful. They have fights and problems - which couple doesn't, their characters are very different but they compliment each other. Their love is beautiful and tender because it is so real, despite their extraordinary circumstances.
With regards to the time travelling aspect of the book, Niffenegger does explore the usual questions about time travel, but only briefly. So Henry does manage to make his family richer by manipulating time, but not by altering world history. There is no 'butterfly effect' in the story it just made me feel that there's not much you can do to change the future So even though the science part of this book is actually fairly unassuming, Niffenegger made the possibility of the time travel more real to me, more plausible.
The book is told through monologues in the first person of Clare and Henry, so that both characters give their own account of the same meetings, this could have been
pretty annoying but it was actually quite extraordinary.
I would say to would be readers this is NOT a sci-fi book but nor is it merely a romance, it is much, much more and certainly worth a read. So if you haven't read it, do give it a try, just keep those tissues handy!!
1 person likes this
8 responses
@ShepherdSpy (8544)
• Omagh, Northern Ireland
16 Jun 10
It's a bit of a chicken and the egg situation in that you could have gone to the cinema to see a movie without realising there had been a book from which the movie was derived...in which case,you could then read the book,and recognise how much was trimmed to create the screenplay,and contrast the two. IMO,a book is a richer experience..various plot threads can be followed and enjoyed...Henry's relationship with his Parents and the trigger of his time travelling are explored in the book,and barely touched on in the Movie..the Movie concentrated on Henry and Claire's relationship,which was the main focus of the book,but the surrounding story was also important..I borrowed the book from a cousin,read and enjoyed it,and then bought a copy for My Fiancee,who Loved it.. I recently bought her the DVD of the movie as we'd been unable to see the movie together in the cinema..We liked the Movie,but recognised how much had been lost in the translation to the screen version..
@ShepherdSpy (8544)
• Omagh, Northern Ireland
16 Jun 10
A movie written for the screen can take advantage of the big screen aspect of filmmaking..scenery,panoramas,explosions,action..A book can have those aspects too,but budget can restrict what'll end up on the screen! The movie would have been much longer with a bigger cast to take in everything from the book..but look how long it took to put "Lord of the Rings" on a big screen,and IT had to have edited and deleted entire sections and characters,even with over 9 hours running time in total!
@virtualmirage (494)
• United States
15 Jun 10
I have not read this particular book nor have I seen the movie but I have always found that a movie is never as good as the book. I sat here a bit and thought back, and was actually surprised when I could NOT remember ever having enjoyed a movie more. Being a huge fan of Stephen King its so sad to see how his wonderful books get turned into cheap and low budget films and lets not even mention what Lifetime does to Mary Higgins Clark books and other similar authors.
@virtualmirage (494)
• United States
23 Jun 10
OMG, exactly !!! LOL
This is a perfect example of a great book made into a hideous movie, my girls had not read the book and when they saw the movie looked at me like I was some sort of clown..
Now i'm sure, they'll never read it!
@ElicBxn (63755)
• United States
18 Jun 10
I really enjoyed The Time Traveler's Wife. It was an amazing story and I really have trouble thinking how they could make a movie of it.
I wasn't sure it would have enough science fiction in it to make me happy, (well, its not a particularly happy story) but I found it very satisfactory.
so, is the movie worth it?
@verabear (796)
• Philippines
16 Jun 10
I haven't seen the movie yet because I haven't had the chance to read the book. I normally would like to start with the book even when there's the risk of the movie not living up to what I've just read. But thanks for sharing your take on the movie and the original novel. Now I can't wait to either read the book or see the movie. :)
@ersanmiguel (476)
• Philippines
16 Jun 10
i've read the book but i haven't seen the film yet and i think it's okay if i can't watch it. like what happened when i saw harry potter movie after reading the first 4 series-i was expecting too much from the film but at least my imagination was vivid as i was reading the final books
@rosie230 (1700)
•
15 Jun 10
Yes I know exactly what you mean... I read the book "What Dreams May Come", and I really enjoyed it, and got right into it I could not put it down. But then I decided to watch the movie, and since it had Robin Williams in it as the main character I thought that it would be really good. But even though I did enjoy it, I found that the book seemed to offer so much more than the film. I think that books are far better than the films, because they give details about certain things, in which films cannot really do. I think that maybe with films they have to miss a few bits and pieces out in order to keep the entertainment value high. Books seem to be able to really pull me in to the situation, and give me a picture in my mind. The films just give you the story and the pictures that they think we would have in our mind if we had read the book. Maybe I have got it wrong, but that is the way that it always seems to me. I am a fan of the author Nicholas Sparks, I have read an awful lot of his books, and each and everyone seems to make me cry, and that is just the book. A few of his films have been made into movies, the newest one is "Dear John" which was released in the cinema not long ago. But my favourite movie was "Message in a Bottle", it really was a good film and well portrayed. I had of course read the book before, but the film really did capture most things that the book covered. I was in tears at the end just like I was with the book, and of course it starred Kevin Costner and well I really do think he is HOT!!!
. So I guess personally speaking I would always read the book first, as I think if I did it the other way round, the element of surprise could go, and not leave you wanting to read the book, since you know the story already!
. So I guess personally speaking I would always read the book first, as I think if I did it the other way round, the element of surprise could go, and not leave you wanting to read the book, since you know the story already!
@oldchem1 (8132)
•
16 Jun 10
I think that i can count the amounts of films that live up to a book in my opinion on just one hand.
I enjoyed reading your response - not too long at all, I'm the master of long discussions anyway- I always get carried away - especially about books and things I love!!
@totallyundecided (3190)
• Philippines
16 Jun 10
The book will always have so much to offer - maybe for the reason that it has so much narration and no time limit for the reader to widen his/her imagination.
I also watched the Time Traveler's Wife and it was a very wonderful flim. Made me cry. But when I shared and recommended it to my friend. She told me that what I have experienced in the film is nothing compare to the book which is more heartbreaking.
I have always been a fan of reading books. It's just that now I got lazy and when it is made to movies - I watch the movie instead and just read the reviews when comparing to the book that the movie is based from.
Rachel McAdams was great in portraying Claire (from a friend's review) and she told me that she did justice to Claire's character. =)
@Sandra1952 (6047)
• Spain
15 Jun 10
Hello, Oldchem. I always think the book is going to be better than the film, simply because the film is going to occupy a couple of hours - three at the most - and you're not going to read the book in that time. Therefore, it follows that by reading the book, you will become more involved with the characters and the story.
And different directors will have different ideas on what should be included in the film and what should be left out, which could totally alter the character and emphasis of the story.
When I did my MA as a mature student, my dissertation concerned the films of Shakespeare, and it was fascinating to see how two directors dealt with the same play, and how the emphasis was completely changed by what they chose to include and exclude.
I'll look out for that book. It's probably not something I would normally have been attracted to, but what you've written about it makes me want to read it. Thank you.
