Finished Harry Potter. Unfortunately, I had very high expectations for the book. While I enjoyed the first Harry Potter book, it did take me quite a while to become interested. By about page 200 I was hooked -- but the first 200 pages seemed to be a lot of background information (boring!).
Having seen the first Harry Potter movie many times, I already knew a lot of the story before even opening the book. I think this had quite an impact on my overall experience with the book. Specifically, I was able to anticipate much of the action and dialogue of the book before it occured. In general, I like book-based movies. It's such an awesome experience to see the characters, settings, and events that you have read so much about. I guess my question is this: Which should come first: the book or the movie??
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
.JPG)
2 comments:
I think that most of the time the book should come first. Most of the time, movies leave out several parts of the book, so in order to get the entire story, you would have to read the book. Also, movies tend to add things that didn't take place in the book. I like to know what the author of the book originally intended to happen.
However, if you have no interest in reading the book, it is okay for you to still see the movie. I personally had absolutely no interest in reading the book Eragon, but I still saw the movie.
I think the book shpuld have came first before the movie because we won't know what would happend in the book before the movie.They will say parts that are in the book but not all the parts of the book are in the movies.So what I'm saying is that the book should came first before the movies.
Sincerely,
Donavan
Post a Comment