josephwise

Did anyone else think "The Wizard of Oz" made a better movie than a book? It seemed to have better thematics and character development. It was also paced better in movie form. I know they left out a lot of cool things for the movie, but the book just seemed "scattered" to me, by comparison.

josephwise

Anarkos said:
I agree with you. In my opinion it had incredible heart, and a very sympathetic and human sadness at its core. Both mediums.

Gyousei

I agree. Movies often choose to portray parts that would get either the audience's eyes glued to the screen, or their ears thumping. Besides, now a days, its often about who is in the movie, for advertising advantages.

FloridaJay

Being a Stephen King fan you can imagine how many times I've been disappointed by the movie versions of his stories. The only movie that ever hit his writing dead-on was The Green Mile. The movie is the book and vice versa. Now when it comes to movies versus books I have to say that hsitorically movies don't do books the justice they deserve. Lord of the Rings, for example, was a good set of movies - until I read the books. Tolkein is such a great writer and his descriptions are magical, something that the movies could not mimic. Don't get me wrong, the movies were good entertainment, but they just couldn't capture everything the books covered (where the hell was Tom Bombadil?). With a book, much is left to the imagination and much is also explained in detail, even what the characters are thinking - this has not been accomplished very well with movies IMHO. Books win!

__________________
I think my keyboard is trying to kill me.
It's in league with that awfully blank page.
They laugh at me while I try to create something from nothing.

Memoirs of a Dead Lesbian Fish Girl