Which one was better...the book or the movie?

I didn't read either of them, but my daughter a police office, read "the Da Vinci Code" and she said it was really hard to read and follow and understand to the point that a couple times, she took the book into work and asked more experienced officers their thoughts as to what was going on or what they were doing in the legal matters. She didn't enjoy reading it once finished. She said it was to much work! On that same note...I heard about Time Travelers Wife...I love time travel movies, but didn't go see it...thought the book would be better, and I'll read it first. I did...well, I tried. The book was exhausting! I mean, every chapter was a different time and age for the two characters! And it wasn't in chronological order either. this chapter was when she was 11 and he was 22. Next chapter was told from his perspective, the next one was told from hers. Next chapter was in (for example) 1997 and the following one was in 1994. Following chapter was when he met himself as a boy, next chapter was after they were married. Next chapter was back when he was 30 and she was 22 etc. It just went back and forth and was really hard to keep track of what was going on...I made it half way through, then just stopped. I was literally to exhausted as I always had to go back and read the previous chapter to remember what happened, only to realize it didn't matter! So I rented the movie...and as bad as the book was...the movie was worse and honestly if I hadn't read the book even just the half way I read... I wouldn't have understood the movie at all. It was so jumbled and weird I couldn't tel what the heck was going on! I didn't finish the movie!

Hi coffee. Though I haven't read the book, I actually liked the movie Time Traveller's Wife. It's true that the scenes are not in chronological order, it was still "understandable" - if that is the right word. It does get confusing because of the time changes specially since the girl's age is not always the same but I think it was still easy to follow what was going on. From the way you described the book it might have been more confusing than the movie. Now I'm not sure what to do. I want to read the book to see if the movie followed the story but I'm afraid that it might be too confusing as you've described it. On another note, has anyone noticed that a lot of movies are now made with lots of flashbacks? It usually starts with a scene from the current time or where the conflict starts and then they go back in time to explain how that conflict came to be. Sometimes they even jump forwards and backwards in time all throughout the movie you end up scratching your head trying to determine if it is the present or the past.

I know what you mean, I felt the same with Wuthering Heights :)) It's true I read it in english ( not my native language), but it is so hard to find a good translation (also in movie subtitles, I can't stand it when they don't get it right).

I read it to and the book wasn't as fanciful and sweet as the original movie. This recent re-make looked so scary I didn't watch it! Didn't want to ruin my memory of the story!

Ya the book wasn't very sweet. But I am a huge Alice in wonderland fan and have found that the book, Disney's version and the new Disney and Tim Burton version are all different but are all very good. The new one was kind of scary though I do agree but I still felt it was very well done. I have also seen other versions of this movie but many of those I didn't find to be as good. There are allot of movies out there though that after watching I think just how good the book could be, I just haven't read any books that has been made into a movie.

I saw the movie, sadly I didn't read the book.I liked the movie very much, but you see, if someone were to make a movie to have all that it's supposed to have, they couldn't possibly be 2 hours long.I think it's quite risky making a movie based on a good book, because you can not live up to the standards of the written word.

It`s allways tough to do enough good movie when it`s based on a great book. There are some movies that are better than the books on which they are based, but they are a small part of all movies based on books.

I am really not a fan of twilight or vampire movies or anything. But when it comes to books and movies I still prefer to have books but then most of the time I don't get the chance to read so if ever I like a movie, I go for it to watch instaed. But if ever I got the chance to see a book sale of some books that seems interesting, I would go for buying it.

I also like the books for that reason, they give you time to adapt, to outline every bit of information, and that great feeling you have when you finish the book, you sort of sum up the book for a moment. I saw and read The Da Vinci Code, but the thing that disturbed me was the fuss made after them, people trying to find things that aren't there. It is nice to daydream, but not take things to extreme.Fiction is fiction. Twilight...well, it's nothing unheard of, nothing new, and definetily nothing special in my opinion, it's just another vampire movie, nicely done, but just that.

I am not saying movies aren't good, and you can't rely on a big director for all of them, and I think it's wrong to admire and overrate a movie because it was directed by.... That's the case with Titanic, yes the special effects were great, but that's kinda it, besides that it's a chick flick.There were so many reproduction of the story, that they couldn't find anything more to say.

i am not talkingabout special effect here.. where in the comment i mentioned anything about special fx or James cameron.?? and titanic is not from a book..its an actual event. im talking about books like Stephen kings..THE SHINING..directed by Stanley Kubrick..imagine if it was directed by some guy from err..Vietnam or sort..couldve been lousy..and that surely made the book better than the film..but since THE SHINING is a good film.. just watching the film is sufficient enough without having to read the actual book.

You are right, they both have merits. But I prefer the intelectual exercise you have to make with a book.I see the kids nowadays, they only know the tv and the computer, and I see they are more violent, but also more obtuse in thinking.It is no wonder, when all they see are scandals, crimes, and bloody, low-budget movies shown all times a day.

Well, for this one, I only read the book.It was, as expected,great.But for this kind of classics, I prefer to see the old versions of the movie,because a time goes by, every version made tends to add something that might not have been intended in the book, to make it special.Even Pride and Prejudice had two endings.

So do I, because sometimes, something happens, a scene that was not well played (or even missing from the script), but was wonderful in the book, a character you like being played by an actor you hate...

The old movies are great to see because of the actors.Nowadays,you can really tell if an actor only has the looks, but not the talent (there are so many cases).Back then they did it for pleasure, it was a commitment to them, it was art.

But there are two sides with the trailers :) they either show the best parts of the movie in them, or they don't show you enough to make you interested

Exactly! And I think that one of the reasons I didn't like Twilight was because of the two actor playing the main characters, the ones I see and hear so much in the media, it's like they are trying to recreate in their life whatever happens in the story.And onestly, there were love scenes with much more chemistry from two people not in love, so if you want to make a great movie with mediocre actors....

I also think that books let your imagination run free.I don't say the movies can't live up to the books, but maybe your own made up version is better, after all :)

You are very fortunate to have more time to read,I have to steal some time to read on the bus to work, or when I eat in the evening( I read at the table since I was 6). I love movies, too, but lately I don't see any imagination in the plots, they just ran out of ideas.

Indeed, the amount of information is much better.Another thing I don't agree with is modifying the plot in the movie, to be better liked by the public.If I wrote a book and someone would want to make a movie on it, I couldn't agree to something like that. I am sorry for your vision, I also have problems with it, but we seem to be able to endure more than we get, don't we?

I agree. For me, it was that,usually I got to read the book first, and, of course, my imagination created a specific world, I had the characters and places embedded in my head :), and after seeing the movie...well ...most of them dissapointed me.

There is much fuss with these movies, I for one am not a great fan of the genre, I wasn't too curious about them,but when you have a series of movies, I think it depend a lot on how you finnish each of them, so that people wish to see the next one.