Which would you rather do -Read a book or Watch a movie- and why?

Funnily, I dont have the attention span to watch films.... I'll get bored and wander off (if it's at home) or just fidget incessantly if it's at the cinema.

Books are, and always will be, my first love. Only food and sex are equal for me!

I'll cut an inevitably long tirade on the wonders of books short here!

i'm not sure i prefer one all that much over the other, but i guess i'd go with books. in general, i like it if it's good (books, movies, TV, even theater -- the La Jolla Playhouse is part of UCSD, and i've been gettin staff or student discounts for the 8 years i've been an affiliate). but i think i like books a little more because i also have a short attention span. i find most movies predictable, and it causes me to start arguing with the movie (ever since Mystery Science Theater 3000 was on, i haven't been able to help myself -- also the reason i haven't been to the movie theater in about 6 years). my mind wanders, and with books it's a lot easier to pick up where i left off. with DVDs it's fairly easy to skip back, but it totally ruins the flow of the movie for me far more than with books. plus, i read a lot of nonfiction. i like documentaries on screen, but there aren't very many, and you can't write personal notes on a film the way you can a book.

I agree with Spearthrower on the wonders of books. Throughout school, and college, I constantly read and comprehended 2-3 levels above anyone my age. But to sit down with a novel of any kind, even one of deep interest, could take me a lifetime. That's why I'm one to deal more with movies. While I can read and understand much the same as anyone else, I can't always "get the picture in my mind" of what the writer is intending. I lose speed and interest in reading. If it's a manual for a program or device, I can become enveloped in it so much as to lose all track of time. I have to admit myself that I still have not figured out why this is with me, and I may never. My wife, or even my brother or mother, can easily sit down with a book and as easily get lost in it. I get more out of seeing than reading. I guess that's why I did well in school and college without using my books much at all. But as my wife says, I'm fairly weird!

I agree with you tlwhite01, Sometimes I just don't see what the writer was seeing. Every time I come to a wonderfully descriptive scene, I have to look up half the words just to even comprehend what their describing... One of the things I kind of like about books is that I get to create the characters image, even if they are on the cover. Like when I first read Harry Potter the first book, I imagined Harry as a blonde kid with freckles with those thin style glasses, then I saw the movie.



UCSD? I think I know what that is, but what is it? I'm curious because I know a UCSD, but it might be different...

---

The very instant you show your weakness, your downfall will begin!

the University of California, San Diego. were you thinking of something else?

I was actually thinking of my school district, but I'd rather not say the name... Interesting coincidence though.

---

The very instant you show your weakness, your downfall will begin!

I have contended for most of my (now getting long) adult life that books and movies are 2 DIFFERENT media, with different strengths and weaknesses, and it is a mistake to compare them too closely. Both entertainment and storytelling, maybe not apples and oranges, but certainly...er...apples and cherries.

I probably favor books. Books generally do detail and thought processes, and character internal point of view better. They handle vast scope of events better, because they essentially have no budget. They are weak in some ways on scene setting and evoking action.

Movies are great on scenes and action, even if the action is the tension between the characters in a room. With the advent of CGI, some of the limits of depicting scope of action have been removed. They are, however, pretty much limited in 3 ways: 1) they have a budget, 2) There is only enough storytelling time in even a very long movie for an involved short story, a novella, or a very, very edited version of a medium novel (preferably one that was written with eventual movie production in mind), 3) they are generally limited to 3rd person perspective.

That having been said, I am a great fan of movies as their own medium. I'm one of the few people I know who insists that if you are at all interested in the subject of a movie, you need to see it first time in a theater, its intended venue, even though DVD rental is cheaper. Anyone who disagrees needs to go to a retrospective and watch the first 5 minutes of Star Wars, or IJ and Raiders of the Lost Ark, in the theater. I say this with a 51 inch screen sitting in my rec room.

drrider

I remember the LJ Playhouse. Our drama club used to take field trips over there. Just down the road, they (Museum of Contemporary Art?) used to host the Spike & Mike's Festival of Animation. Do they still do that? Ack! I think I feel homesick!!

But to keep this on-topic, I prefer movies. There's only a few authors I enjoy enough to sit down and delve into an entire book. A movie usually isn't too much of a time demand unless it inspires me to delve further into the topic. However, I have a third option that usually trumps both and that's to play a game. It's like creating your own story, forging your own destiny and inspiring your own fun all at once.

Reader here. I typically read one or two novels per week.



Agreed. Comics are sort of a midway point between the two mediums, as well, I think. Games, too, perhaps, if we want to get into more interactive media.



Books also require a more active participation from the user than films do -- a strength, I think.



Well, I wouldn't go that far, but I do refuse to watch films in other than their intended aspect ratio. Cutting the sides off of a film so that it fits a TV screen is very offensive to me. It's like cutting the legs off Michaelangelo's David so that it will fit in your house. It's an insult to the artist.

I find something similar. If i read the book first, that sets the characters' images in my mind. If I see the movie first, there's usually a much worse connection between what I read in the book and what is planted in my brain by the movie. I learned not to see the movie first, or if I do, don't bother with the book because I'll get see-sick.

BTW what you stated about having to look up the words, Darth_Silhouette? That's a different kind of interaction than just being "brainwashed" by graphical input ... what you are doing when you look up the meanings is actually growing new brain-cells and making new connections between synapses. You're getting smarter. That's the real value of books, something films can not duplicate, IMHO.

Watching a movie does not grow or connect anything new especially, no learning process takes place. Unless I have an interest in the costumes and historical significance of the buildings or tools or something which I can store in memory, it's a null-program. Simple action fliks just come in over my current connections like electronic jamming or shock-treatments.

Another important point for me is that you can carry books(important for me as I have spent a considerable portion of my life travelling)! You can also read them in the toilet..... you can take them on a boat..... you can sit on the beach with them..... you can while away the hours at an airport... you can give meaningful ones to people you care about.... you can find hidden treasures, snippets of the wisdom of the ages in them.... you can learn and grow from them.

Books, even more so than dogs, are a man's best friend.... ok they're not as cuddly, but they don't sniff your girlfriend's crotch or shit on your lawn either.

I'd mostly rather watch paint dry than watch the utter pap that's so often screened in the cinema these days... yes there are real quality movies, but more and more I just see pap and propaganda.... drivel for the masses to lap up. Very few films challenge you to think, and while there are times when you need to turn off the grey lump in your head.... I wouldn't recommend making a habit of not thinking!

Reading requires active thought, not simply receptivity. Reading requires you to think critically, analytically while doing so for films generally undermines the entertainment value of them.

Some books have been gateways to new worlds for me.... figuratively speaking, opening my mind to new ideas and possibilities.... books are imbued with subtle, hidden meanings that you strive to locate and to digest. If it's not up-front and in your face in a film, it's generally lost.

I am forced to accept that I ended up doing what I said I wouldn't and ranting on for ages!! and also that someone already posted the most important point - the two medias are incomparable.

It depends.

Books are a great. Pick a quiet corner and lose yourself in the world of your imagination. Can't be beat. For something like Dune, or LOTR, or Heinlein or Asimov; books are the best. But I also love reading history and the Bible. These are the authors and subjects that do not translate well into the limited medium of film.

Movies are great, also. Just watched the new Transformers movie last night and it was non-stop action from beginning to end. The story was weak, superficial and childish - BUT WHO CARES!

It totally depends on my mood.

There is nothing like the depth of experience that a great novel will give you and nothing like the perspective that a great mind can offer in factual texts either.

There is also nothing like the felling you get while immersed in the audio visual thrill ride of a truly great movie, nor the touch of actuality that a well crafted and balanced documentary can give.

So I have to say both, for their own unique reasons.

PS "a picture says a thousand words" but also a very few words can speak of an idea that is impossible to picture.

I have to agree with spearthrower on movies, there just aren't very many good ones. My wife rents movies all the time; I can sit through about 1 in 5. Whereas I don't think I ever quit reading a book partway through.

I can understand others not being able to visualize book characters, but for me movies actually ruin it sometimes. I saw the movie "Rising Sun" before I read the book. While reading it, all I could picture was Sean Connery. I like to be able to imagine the characters, and in this case I couldn't.

To make a good book, all you need is a good writer. To make a good movie, you need a good director, actors, screen writer, score, etc. If any one of those is terrible, generally so is your movie.

It depends on the author, some have a gift that makes characters feel almost real.
same is true for movies though.

I find some movies and books so weak they have to be put aside.
I just hope you find a media to enjoy.

Marcus.

i depends on if the book is good or not and same with the movie

Movies have loads to compete with though, but that doest mean there aren't great movies,

Marcus

yep, it is the MoCA and Spike 'n' Mike's Sick & Twisted film festival is still a yearly tradition.

The only books i have ever read, are the ones i was forced to read while going through my school years.

Not that i have anything against reading, i mean, i read all the time in my job but i do suspect excessive reading would have to have a detrimental effect on your eyes.... apart from the known effects of maintaining a static focus that is.

Mystikmind,
have you never thought of reading?
I think you should try, you are an intellectual kind of man.
I think you might like it.

if you don't , then no worries, its your mind after all,


Marcus

I've read an average of 2 books a week for the last 20 years.... and my eye-sight is perfect!

I'd be surprised if reading actually caused any more damage than staring at a brightly lit screen!

One thing I think some people forget is, we're really just reading right now. Reading is reading whether its a book, a forum, a game with a lot of subtitle speaking, etc. So whoever says I don't read on a forum, your reading right now. Yes, books are probably the purest form of reading, but if you spend most of your time in front of a computer, like me, you still do some reading.  I'll bet that this entire forum has over 500 pages of written word (give or take, its just an estimate).

---

The very instant you show your weakness, your downfall will begin!

Reading is not somthing that interests me much, and if you were to ask me had i read any books that impressed me in my life, well, only one book truely impressed me, and that was 'empire of the sun', based on a true story. Also i have read the bible several times and my all time favourite story there was when Jesus drew a line in the sand in defence of the prostitute, very excellently depicted in one of the flashbacks in that movie 'the passion'.



That's good. But since so many 'book worms' wear glasses, it easily gives one the impression that reading must be bad for your eyes. Certainly bright computer screens could be more damaging as well.

One thing that I actually do sometimes when I have insomnia is read the dictionary, that puts me right to sleep! A, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l, m, n, o, p, q, r, s, t, u, v, w, x, y, and Zzz... Aah, the wonderful sleep inducing power of the alphabet. FEAR IT!

---

The very instant you show your weakness, your downfall will begin!

I used to read the bible if i couldn't sleep! Nowdays if i cannot sleep i just listen to music with my earphones. I love that soundtrack to the movie 'Man on fire' That is relaxing music, beautiful, also the soundrack for 'the man from snowy river' is totally awesome. Some of my other favourite music comes from other movie soundtracks as well, conventional music is mostly just crap in comparison.