You read a book? CONGRATULATIONS! *pops you one in the face*

[Vesayen]

People I cant stand..... those who read a book then saw the movie for the book and arogantly say "The book was so much better!"

CONGRA-JA-FREAK-IN-LATIONS! You read a book? Want a cookie? If there is anything that pisses me off after greedy ceo's, its arrogant psuedo wanna be intellectuals. I read 3 books a week and never mention it on conversation, which is the reason this pisses me off so much especially. I would think a large chunk of poly are "readers"-people who read a descent amount so most of you can proboably share my frustration.

Reading a book is no great acomplishment, if you think it is and feel like your special for reading a book, it means your actually mentally deficient but the world has been too polite to inform you of that fact.

[FrostyBoy]

You're implying that reading books is difficult?

It's a fact, books are better than the movie.

[mrmitchell]

I don't read anything except the warning labels on electric appliances that warn me not to use my toaster in the pool.

But I agree with you. I didn't come to see if some ****in book was better, *******, I came to watch the ****ing movie.

[Urban Ranger]

Re: You read a book? CONGRATULATIONS! *pops you one in the face*

Originally posted by Vesayen
People I cant stand..... those who read a book then saw the movie for the book and arogantly say "The book was so much better!"

Why is it arrogant?

[Vesayen]

Re: Re: You read a book? CONGRATULATIONS! *pops you one in the face*

Originally posted by Sn00py
You're implying that reading books is difficult?

It's a fact, books are better than the movie.

People who read books on a regular basis are smarter then people who dont.

Stereotypes arent always bad or untrue, in 99.9999% of the cases this is the case a reader is smarter then a non-reader, which is why they are driven to reading.

If someone is a reader you can tell without them telling you, at least this has been my experience-it may differ for you.



These morons think books are difficult because they dont normally read them, and their friends, familly etc(morons tend to live in heards or flocks) dont read either. Thus they scream "look how special I am for reading a book!".

It's never about the book being better or worse-its about them wanting to look special.



BTW LOTR books were awful, but I loved the movies

Originally posted by Urban Ranger




Why is it arrogant?

See above, these morons want to act as if they are suddenly superior for reading a whole gosh golly darn book-so now they can sit in judgment of all creation.

[Asher]

Books are more detailed. Sometimes this is good, sometimes it is bad.

[Vesayen]

Example of bad: Lord of the rings-where there are so many proper nouns introduced on each page that you confuse people with mountain ranges with battles-you need to keep notes to make sense of it....

[Asher]

I couldn't stand the LOTR books either.

[The Mad Monk]

Whenever I read a thread like this, I immediately think of Jurassic Park. I read it when it first came out. I loved it -- must have gone through it at least a half dozen times, and it helped mold my thoughts on the concept of "responsible science".

Then the movie came out.

I was looking forward to it -- here was one of my favorite all-time reads, brought to life on the silver screen! In a rare instance of zealotry, I actually mange to see it the first week.

...

I'm sure it's a good movie.

...

That was the last thing I was thinking when I stumbled out of that theatre. They had taken that masterpiece, ripped the guts out, changed characters to the point they were unrecognizable, merged and deleted, and screwed up the message. They made it so damn...Hollywood.

I will never forgive them for that.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Vesayen
See above, these morons want to act as if they are suddenly superior for reading a whole gosh golly darn book-so now they can sit in judgment of all creation.

People saying that don't bother me at all. If I see a movie with a bunch of people and somebody says "the book is so much better" I would be more tempted to track down the book to see if that is the case.

[Space05us]

BTW LOTR books were awful, but I loved the movies

AKA "The book sucked, the movie was better!"

sorry, but the only people who have ever told me this are the people who dont read books, hear someone say "The book was better" and then go out get a copy read the first page and get frustrated that there weren't any pictures.

even my friends who are half witted morons agree that the book is most of the times better than the movie. LOTR being a good example because just about everyone I know has read them.

[Imran Siddiqui]

sorry, but the only people who have ever told me this are the people who dont read books, hear someone say "The book was better" and then go out get a copy read the first page and get frustrated that there weren't any pictures.

Obviously you've never read and seen 'American Psycho' or 'The Godfather'. In both cases the movies were better.

And I believe the movies are on the same level as the LOTR books.... the LOTR books are some of the most overrated works in history though .

[Space05us]

the book is most of the times better than the movie

maybe I misworded my post, I was trying to point out that you dont have to be smart to like a book.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Here's the deal:

Great books tend to make mediocre movies. Random examples: A Thousand Acres, The Human Stain, The Great Gatsby, Orlando, Beloved. Why? Because great novels hav a richness and complexity that are not easily rendered in 2 hours on film. Moreover, film is an awful medium for capturing a characters interior psychological state -- which is why adaptations of Henry James, F. Scott Fiztgerald, and pretty much any modernist tend to fall flat on screen. Beyond that, the market for great books, and the aesthetic expectations of that market, are quite different from the market for films; the result is that, when Hollywood adapts books for its market, it also has to alter the aesthetics, generally with unfortunate results (think here of the recent Scarlet Letter and its appalling happy ending).

By contrast, mediocre books often make good or even great movies. Random examples: Gone with the Wind, The Godfather, Blade Runner, The Shining, Touch of Evil. Why? Because their popular sensibility matches that of Hollywood, and they are often "polished" in their adaptation (especially true of The Godfather); the movie can act like a second, better draft rather than an adaptation. Also, if significant changes are easier to make in order to improve the text (as was the case with The Shining), since the text is not considered "sacred."

So sometimes the book is better than the movie, and some people know that. Get over it.

[Flubber]

vesayen

RELAX

people who mention they read something are not asserting their intellectual superiority, they are just mentioning something related to the topic at hand- IF discussing a movie well golly shucks a comment on the book on which it is based is not out of order

I shudder to think what you would say if someone commented they had seen the movie at an IMAX