Top 10 Reasons Why Books are Better Than Movies

I don't care how you pronounce their names, I will pronounce Siuan the way I want to. I also don't care what color coat Mat is wearing, he always wears green. Ogier are walking trees! That's all the complaints I have. Remember, don't judge a book by its movie. Besides, why would you watch a movie when you can read? I was reading a minute ago.

Okay. 500 people read a Harry Potter book for the first time. They will have each 500 different versions of how Harry, Ron, Hermione look like. Next they watch the movie. Now they think that only Harry looks like Radcliffe, Ron like Grint, and Hermione like Watson.

If you watch a film and then read the book it is not exciting because the image of the character is already in your mind, whereas if you read the book first, you are able to picture the looks of the characters in your own way.

You all do realize not everyone is imaginative. Not everyone is going to love books. While I am both a book worm and a movie binge watcher, you must know that not everyone is imaginative, so reading can be difficult.

In movies, a lot of times, brilliantly developed characters fail to impress because of the actor's inability to perform the role.

Movies always remove your vision of the book and bad acting ruins the book. EVERYTHING in the movie ruins the book!

Logan Lerman was about five years older than Percy shoulda been in both The Lightning Thief and The Sea of Monsters.

This is very true because the book could be anything beyond imagination yet the acting could ruin the whole movie.

If you ask me what I want to do for you know, lets say two hours, and we can't go somewhere, then I would grab a blanket (or ice tea for the summer) and one of the Harry Potter books. The it could stretch over two hours, and probably filled the two hours.

Movies last about 2 hours. A book can last for a day, a week, a month or even longer. It's like chocolate. You either eat it fast, or savor every bite until it melts on your hands.

You can read a book at your own pace. You can either enjoy it slowly over a few weeks, or you can devour it in a day or two.

Mini series are also better than movies for this exact reason. I hate movies.

Even the simplest characters like Greg Heffley are spot on in the books, but just seem off in movies. Zachary Gordon wasn't that bad, but since there were at least 7 Wimpy Kid books out by the time the movie version of Dog Days came out he was almost 20. So, they tried a remake. Those never work.

In movies they often do not say what the characters are thinking, we can just only look at the way they act, while in books there is usually sentences of the way the characters feel (for example "the heart is beating faster") and/or think. Such a way an actor from movies can not expose.

Harry Potter looked way different in my head, and I almost wouldn't watch the second movie, because I didn't like how almost all my favorite characters were changed.

Yeah books give you a much better character and you can get to know the character with the information from the book.

Totally concur. I love films but I'm forced to imagine only what the actors project. With books, the imagination is limitless. I don't want to be shown what's going on; I want to use my imagination and be creative with it.

Authorial intent always messes everything up. I want to decide how everything happens.

Yeah! Books allow you to create the scene the way you want it to look, so you imagine.

Yeah, but not everyone have a great imagination.

I think this is the most important point here. likewise when we want to teach the kid the first thing that we did it is the alphabet then reading a stories to build their vocabulary. so I courage this point

I need to pay my respects to this amazing list. Let's have a moment of commemorative silence.

Apart from doing something recreational, you're also doing something productive.

Books can really be helpful in improving your English or any other language that you read.

A great example for this is the Percy Jackson movies vs books. The movie changes Annabeth's character completely! She is meant to be blond, with grey eyes, and in the book she has red hair! Plus nothing in the movie is in depth, and they value Hades the bad guy

Apart from narrating the storyline in depth, books explain the thoughts going through a characters' minds while performing an action, which lets you connect with them better and immerse yourself deeper in the story. Example: The Shining - Book VS Movie. While reading the book I felt Jack was a close friend and I started caring for him. But his character in the movie felt sort of underdeveloped, the Overlook hotel too. It was the main reason why Stephen King hated the movie adaptation of his masterpiece.

Case in point:Wind in the Willows
The book was awesome. Mole was the beginning character, who meets Rat, and teaches him the ways of the river. Then, Toad, the fickle, utterly insane amphibian, crashes his cart and sees a motorcar, which literally hypnotized him. And Badger was amazingly funny. "Don't pretend to be stupider than you really are."
Now the movie.
This was a sorry excuse of a tale (this is the Disney one.) No funny Badger, no Wild Woods, no weasels taking over Toad Hall and beating the other animals out (yes, they did take over in the movie, but on a deal.) In third grade, we learned that Disney movies like Pocahontas weren't true to history. Now, in 5th grade, the same thing applies to books. Really, that movie was almost as cringeworthy as Frozen...
Book Rating:Phenomenal
Movie Rating:Atrocious

Game of Thrones is a great example of this. Each and every character has their own thoughts and feelings about one another, the chapters are full of life, it makes you feel like you ARE inside the characters head. Not to mention each chapter -depending on which character it is- will have its own tone- Woah, wait a minute, that was turning into a Game of Thrones review, anywho. BOOKS ARE awesome.

It depends on the movie and the book, but I must agree. Percy was funnier in the books, Tris wasn't so girly, Katniss stayed the same but I just couldn't get interested in the movies.

It depends, really. But as a general rule, I agree. For example, the movie Big Fish is sooo much better than the book. But I HATED the Percy Jackson movies (but then again, what person who actually read the books didn't?).

What I said for Books more detailed.

Unless the author takes a full page describing a character's car or beverage.

Even if they did (for some reason), you could easily fast forward it.

Yea that's great reason

This is so true. Almost all my favorite books got turned into bad movies because the quality and accuracy to the book were bad. But they choose great actors for the roles.

A lot of directors are so focused on making money that they stop caring about their movies' quality. They know what sells, and so, they follow the basic blueprint which is sure to get the masses filling up theatres. An infamous example: The Transformers Series.

But the chart says...

You are right

Nothing ticks me off more than a good book being turned into trash because the movie was poorly developed.

You can really understand whats happening, in movies it always a bit of a jumble of explotions and yelling, in books way more understandable when there is a fighting scene

Yes of course they are... I totally agree...

You can't lug a TV, a DVD player, and a remote everywhere you go. However, you can carry a book in a purse, a pocket, a bag or just in your hand as you wander mindlessly looking at the book and trying not to bump into things.

You will have to worry about having electricity to play the movie. You just need a comfortable space and good lighting to read a book.

Movies are portable too these days, because of tablets and smart-phones, but a lot of people have to worry about storage, wi-fi, headphones, etc.

That is true you cannot bring a movie to school the movie you may want is not appropriate for school so what's the point.

A books character isn't someone 'acting' it's the person in their own right, they are themselves, they KNOW how to act out their own emotion. For one they're not getting payed to act out someone elses life/feelings. an actor can only ever portray a characters emotions not live them.

A good actor can be much more expressive than text, due to being able to see what the character's going through rather than having to rely on the narrator/characters to convey it through words.

A good story can't be told to it's full potential in two and a half hours.

We can read books again and again.

Movies don't have the same budget as books, books budget is imagination

It is true because it gives a lot of useful thing to improve your reading level

Yes! This is what a lot of people would want, who doesn't want to get smarter?

Financially, books help educationally as movies do not.

I agree it gives you more education.

Books are better because allow you to express your imagination and creativity of mind

A story you have read over a few days stays with you longer.

So are movies, but I get the point.

But books last longer

Ticket price + popcorn and a drink - for a movie which will last no more than three hours vs the price of a book - which will last for a week or two.

It depends on the book price. A movie might be 20 - 30 dollars and a book might be 10-20 dollars. So I would go with the cheapest one and the greatest one.

If you borrow books from a library, they cost NOTHING unless you order a book and then you pay a mega small borrowing fee.

Ok that's right, but it's better to chose quality over quantity.

Movies just plop the actor into whatever the first scene is and usually rush the background information or throw it in the trash. Book based movies usually convey the message, "This is (insert favorite book character here). He/she is the main character. We don't care about their background. Okay?"

Books are awesome

I KNOW! I'm currently doing a project at school in with I am writing a The 39 Clues Fan-Fic, and LOVE the way my ideas are turning up! No one stops me from writing what I think!

Actually, in books, authors normally have more permission to add dirty or suggestive themes in their books than in movies because there are no actors and because you're not actually visually seeing it.

What?! This is not a reason that books are good... also it depends on what you're reading. Obviously the magic tree house isn't going to have sexual scenes but have you ever read any page of Game of Thrones?

Quite often, suggestive scenes in books can be more descriptive than in movies. Also, what's with the extreme hate towards anything vaguely sexual?

Yes that's true

In movies all the ugly characters look ugly but in books you can imagine how you want all if the characters to look.

Thanks for the info

True, although we do have reading apps now. Though I still prefer hard cover books.

A good point in favour of books, I vastly prefer books to movies and the simple convenience is a reason why, as well as personal preference