Kind of feel like addressing some things that get on my nerves because there seems to be a serious lack of thought in the criticism that “books are better than films and films are better than theatre”. Likewise between movie remakes, that movies shouldn’t be remade for what ever pretentious reason.

Not going to hang on these rants though since I’ve got loads to do today and I’ve discovered that I’m in a REALLY ranty mood right now.

One of the faily obvious things about movies and books is that they’re completely different, and they’re completely different mediums. Like films and games movies are adaptations of books. Likewise theatre, theatre a bit like books is much more based on the spoken word where movies are greatly based on actions instead of words. When adapting a book to a movie, the movie might even completely rely on how well it’s been adapted, for example if Alexander Mackendrick had adapted a book I’m sure he’s one of the very few that could actually pull it off.

I’m bias about this obviously, but sharing some of what I know so people actually know why books and movies are different. I’m dyslexic, I’m also a film student.. obviously I like movies better because I really dislike reading novels.. As much as I would like to enjoy reading I can’t. Doesn’t mean I’m not creative or don’t have an imagination which are often criticism for films vs books. I make movies, I have a really creative mind.

I just read a book and feel nothing, movies are a mixture of moving images combined with sounds and great composed music… I’m a massive fan of composed music so when they put a great classical track over meaningful moving images it’s so much more moving than a book could ever be.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder though.