A tough act to follow (The film of the book)

Member Name: bruffyboy

Product:	The film of the book
Date:	06/10/09 (12 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: can be great

Disadvantages: can be too basic

This is a good topic for me, because I would say I am as much a book man as a film man. Do they ever make a good film out of a book? Invariably the answer is no, but there are exceptions, notably the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Here's what I think:

Firstly, the thing that makes books better than films nine times out of ten is the time and effort that has gone into them. Often, these books are years in years in the making, being planned and crafted in their writer's minds before ever a draft comes out. The end result is often as close to perfection as possible, and this is where they overtake films. Because films are shot on such high costings, they don't have forever to make them. Time constraints lead to sloppiness, and sloppiness never can be hidden on the silver screen. The result is a rushed film that shows its weakness. The exception to this rule is the Lord of the Rings trilogy, where a painstaking effort went into getting everything right, but this is the exception.

Also, there is the way that they need to condense a book which may take 12 hours average to read, into a 90 minute film. Invariably they cut corners, and the result is a lot shallower than the book. Take, for example, the recent Time Traveler's Wife -excellent book, average film. The weaknesses came from dumbing down the complex story to make it more accessible and easy to understand - surely a mistake.

Finally, when you read a book you picture the characters and settings in your mind as you want them, and filmmakers often do it all differently, which often ruins it for you.

All in all, books are better, but if a vast effort is put into the film then there's no reason it too can't be brilliant.

Summary: do it