The Daily Roxette discussions forum has been closed. The forum is only available as a read-only archive.
Harry potter books are way better then the movies!
11 replies
MizzFinlandia said on November 5, 2005 18:29:
I think that harry potter is MUCH better as books then as movies..ANy way, thats just what I think...
;) XD :)
ally77 said on November 5, 2005 19:31:
I’ve got all the books, and I intend to buy them in Swedish when I am there in December, good language learning idea of mine! lol
I think books are always better than the films, but I equally love the HP movies as well, going to see the new one this Thursday got myself an advance screening ticket from my local cinema!
MizzFinlandia said on November 5, 2005 19:33:
ok..:) i have them in engils but ive readen them in swedish and finnish too! ( im from finland)
Oldag75 said on November 5, 2005 22:41:
The overwhelming majority of books that are made into films are better than the films. That is primarily because the active mental engagement required by prose is vastly richer than the passive observation experienced while viewing the film – and in books, you are often treated to a character’s extremely interesting thoughts/motivations, which can result in bland portrayal when the resulting actions are merely observed.
The two best movie versions of fine books that I’ve ever seen were “Lonesome Dove” and “Lord of the Rings.” (“A Clockwork Orange” was pretty good, too – which garnered that film an Academy Award for best screen adaptation of a work not originally composed as a screenplay.)
The bottom line: Books are always better.
chrisjankunas said on November 5, 2005 22:49:
I think the films are especially ruined by the cutting of parts - obviously they need to make it into a 2 hour film or however long - but they should have released an extended DVD version of each. It would have sold like mad if done properly.
Majdy said on November 7, 2005 15:26:
why book are better ? :
because it has so many details, and the story are more complex.
why movie is better :
because we can see what Rowling try to describe in the books.
WorldFalls said on November 9, 2005 02:48:
Ally, you are right on about buying the Swedish Harry Potter books to help you learn the language. I’m trying to learn Danish and I bought the first four HP books in Danish; very helpful! If you can find the audio CD to go with the books, that will help you even more because it will give you a better idea about pronunciation! Good luck with learning Swedish. It’s a lot of work, isn’t it? :o)
Santi said on November 9, 2005 03:35:
I think literature and film are two very different arts and very hard to compare. The only thing they have to do with each other is that they tell a story. That’s the only similarity.
I’ve not read a single HP book, and I have just seen 1 of the movies “by accident”. I thought the film was quite OK, but I can’t compare.
The only thing that would make in my opinion a film better than a book is that a film is very selective because you can’t do it as long as you want (unless you get to do a TV series). Sometimes I think some writers should take care of the readers and not make so long books...
Anyway, motion pictures have little to do with written language as a means of communication and it is a bit unfair to compare them. As Bergman said, films have more to do with music than with any other art.
Santi said on November 9, 2005 03:45:
Chris: Can you imagine the price of what you propose? For books you need some 10 people working hard, 3 computers and some word processors.
For a movie about magic you may need 1000 working very hard, a lot of luck, very specialized artists in very different fields, hundreds of computers animating, modelling and rendering (maybe you know how much it takes to render 1 hour of video in a very complicated composite animation... well in a huge rendering farm it may take up two months... that you have to pay to very specialiazed people)... It would take a completely different montage if you want to include more details, and I guess they adapt the stories for the movies, so probably they’d have to change the storytelling style as well. That’s a lot of time for the screenwriters, director, producer, director of photography.
Do you think that’d be profitable for a “direct into DVD” release???
ally77 said on November 9, 2005 09:55:
@ Worldfalls... yeah it’s taking many many years! ermmm about 12 now! :) I am buying the books as I really enjoying reading another language, other than Gyllene Tider, or Kent lyrics!
MiracleMan said on November 5, 2005 18:44:
They are indeed. The films are good, though. There’s a lot they couldn’t put in the films, but they’ve done a good job distilling them down to the important bits. I liked Goblet of Fire the best. The Order of the Phoenix was slower, still good. I’ve yet to read the sixth. . .soon I think.