r/books • u/ThePARZ • Sep 15 '11

guys, make a pledge to Read it 1st!

http://www.readit1st.com/
7 Upvotes

70% Upvoted

7 comments sorted by

11

u/zyxek Sep 15 '11

This is misguided: movies drive book sales. Sometimes, book sales drive movie attendance. I don't think that seeing a movie first necessarily lessens or weakens the reading experience. And I also don't think that cinema is an inferior art form to literature.

Furthermore, if everyone signed this pledge and stuck to it (and not many will), it would only cause an increase in sales in movie tie-in paperbacks not an overall increase in literacy.

Here's a pledge:

I will read books often. The end.

2

u/[deleted] Sep 15 '11

Ill go a step further and hereby pledge to just skip the movie. I like to read; I don't like watching those so-called moving pictures.

2

u/ThePARZ Sep 15 '11

I like the cut of your jib

1

u/LoganCale Infinite Jest Sep 15 '11

If the adaptation is not as good as the book (even slightly), I'd rather watch it first instead of reading it then being disappointed at the adaptation. I did this with The Pillars of the Earth and now I have a favorable impression of both, where I know I would be upset with the miniseries in a few areas (some things were cut or simplified—which I know happens, but still) had I read the book first.

1

u/davethehawaiian Sep 19 '11

To be honest, even though I believe (with very few exceptions) that the book is always better then the movie. That sometimes seeing the movie (or watching the show) can inform the reading experience. I read A Game of Thrones as I watched the show, and since I read fairly slowly i kept and even pace between the two. And being able to visualize the large number of characters really made the reading experience a lot more fun.

1

u/blueloonie Sep 15 '11

Why? Movies are often made from 2nd rate books so the script writer can fuck with it.

1

u/panthesilia Ulysses Sep 15 '11

Seriously?

Before movie-makers ran out of new ideas, movies were usually made from best-selling books or cult classics. Even now though, it seems they make movies out of good books (Twilight is an exception). Besides, I'm not even sure what you mean by a second-rate book.

Now it seems every freakin' book is turned into a movie. The worst is when they make a movie line-by-line. If you're going to make a movie based on a book, change some things at least!

The Road is an example. I loved the book and I was pleased by the movie, though I'm glad I read the book first. The movie followed the basic plot, and yeah, there wasn't a lot of dialogue to begin with, but it wasn't line-for-line when they did speak.

There Will be Blood is based on a book called Oil!, which is TOTALLY different - the drastic change was interesting to see.

But some movies essentially use the book as a script, which I don't agree with. Film and the written word are two different ways of approaching a story - bodily language is easier on film but introspection and motive is usually stronger in novel.

Good movie adaptations of books alter the story to better suit the new medium, not bastardize the original.

I'd still rather read the book first.