What I'm wondering is has anyone read the book AFTER they saw the movie and which did they prefer? Because I have a theory people tend to prefer the medium they see first.
I hadn't read the book, so when the movie came out, I promised someone I'd see it before reading the book so she could get an honest view on how well the movie captured the book. I read the book after I saw the movie.
I think the movie is a very faithful adaptation in nearly ever respect.
There are nice touches in the book that aren't in the movie, of course. But then again, there are things in the production design of the movie, such as the Cornucopia design, that I rather like better.
(ugh, it's late here; back to bed, & now that the neighbours have quieted down, probable sleep)
Ah I see, interesting to hear that point of view. I had no idea about your first point, obviously, and I'll have to wait until I read the book to form a fuller opinion. On the second point, I think the movie did highlight its significance, but it failed to really highlight what that significance is - I had to make a couple of assumptions to help it all fit together.
In that sense I'm almost a bit scared to read the book, I think some of my assumptions, the filler and interpretations that i created lead me to really like it, but the book could end up going in a less interesting direction.
Well, right now there's tons of reserves on the books in the library, I will just have to be patient rofl
I liked the books more.
I thought the movie was very accurate to the books in the details, but not the essence? I realize the intricate workings of the character's minds are difficult to portray on the screen, without having to resort to voice-overs, but I felt the characters were very bland.
And then I just hated the design aspect of the entire film.