Reading is very important. Because a book is so very indepth and presents ideas in a much more intresting way than any movie. For example Dune, the novel is infinitly more intresting and fun to read than the movie. Hell I haven't seen a good movie in the last 2 years.

The same could be said for any novel.

I do hear that people who have read the book, are usually dissapointed with the movie, however i have to say that the movie 'empire of the sun' for me was far more brilliant because i had read the book. Although i think that movie was directed by Stephen Spielberg and if anyone knows how to make a book come to life in movie.... need i say more?

If your hungry for a good movie.... i just recently watched 'Transformers', yes it is based on a semi lame cartoon series but forget about that, that movie was totally awesome, action packed, blew me away!!! fantastic

In my previous quote;



I forgot to mention that statement is just personal preferance, not fact.

I think that might be a stereotype rather than being a fact.

Not really,,, lets call it.... 'observational science'. You see a pattern, in this case, how so many book worms wear glasses and then look at what all book worms have in common, IE they read allot, and since you use your eyes to read... aha, aha (Mystikmind points his figer in the air expressing an idea) Reading must be bad for your eyes.

There is no escaping statistics, they always point directly to the cause unless God is playing a practical joke or somthing?

Well, I'm gonna say movies, for the following reason: I can watch and be mildly interested in a sh**ty movie, but I simply cannot focus and read a sh**ty book.

For me it depends, if you talk about same thing (like an movie made by the book versus book itself) then I prefer the book since rarely movie made of good book is as good as book itself.
But in other cases I like movies, the problem with them however that I like SciFi and there are not many of good SciFi available and that is present sometimes primitive or childish or unfinished.

Speaking of books (and no intent to try and co-opt this thread) you might wanna check out this other thread for a lot of good suggestions of sci-fi books to read, if you are interested in such. -> Sci-Fi Books - Shaped my perceptions I recommend anyone begin with READING "Starship Troopers" [Robert A. Heinlein](the movie is crap-0-la)

Are you telling this to me or "in general" ?

Because if you address me I think I can find most of the book mentioned there between ~1500 books I own

Just a general comment. 1500 books? You have your own library. I can't find "Armor" by Steakley (or however it's spelled) even at the local big used book store, which has prolly 1,500 books or more. Guess I'll have to order it.

I picked up another Jet Li movie today, "Fearless" ... really liked "The One" - kinda sci-fi-ish ... That other film he did located in China wasn't quite so good imho. I hope "Fearless" has a good plot. Says it's based on a true story. Anyone else like Jet Li movies? Gonna watch it now.

You liked 'The One' ? I watched that movie, the action was good but there was some critical flaw in the plot, i forget exactly but it was like a giant great big time or dimentional paradox error that was just too big to ignore and ruined the movie for me.

Where are the statistics? I just see your own observation on your slice of life. The science you explain is called "empirical observation" and it's not justified unless supported by reams of field data..... way beyond beyond one person's stereotype!

Funnily, of all my friends, the only people who wear glasses are those who really enjoy watching films.... it would be easy to make unproven assumptions from that too! Something like.....

All crows are black, no crow is not black, therefore everything that is black is a crow.


The only truth to your idea is from days of yore, where readers (normally clergy) would peruse their books by candle light. Most people now know that reading needs to be done in a strong enough light source so that you dont "strain" your eyes. Even that doesn't damage your eyesight though, it's a temporary condition.

hehehe yea, after making my post i thought you would say stuff along the exact lines that you did. Fair enough too!

I will say that my post has a valid point but in the real world is is far from infalable as you clearly demonstate, but that does not meen my point should be totally dissregarded either.

The movie "Fearless" [Jet Li] didn't have a book as a source, from what I can tell. The articles on Wikipedia on the movie and the real-life character were interesting though. [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fearless_%282006_film%29 ][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huo_Yuanjia ]

BTW this is one of the best martial-arts movies I've ever seen. I recommend it for sure!

Which is why books are better, because without the depth of written prose, it will appear childish. Hell after reading a good book, watching any sci-fi- even the most acclaimed- feels childish. Even when your your watching things such as Babylon 5 and (the first set of Startrek- the new stuff stinks) feels noobish.

I blame American culture, we British- Greatest nation in the world(ROFL), has the given the world the best Sci fi ever, John Wyndham, H.G wells, Arthur C. Clarke among other. And the 'New world' gave us in return, L. Ron Hubbard and scientology.

We gave you DR. Who(greatest TV Sci-fi ever) you gave use noobish Star-trek.

Even in radio science fiction (do american do radio anymore?) we are miles ahead,
With James Follett Earthsearch and Charles Chilton's Journey into space.
-If your intrested you can hear these on BBC7(www.bbc.co.uk/bbc7) saturday and sunday
6.00pm and 12.00 am(GMT) or on the lister again feature. They are classic examples of British Science fiction and yes there is a heck of a lot of differnece betwen American and British Sci-fi. Just as there a differnce between beef and pork, though both are red meat and both very taste... um pork. Damn thats american to isn't it.

No offence meant just I can imagine some rather 'paroitic' empty head people taking offence.

Depends on what I want. I generally watch movies to see thigns that aren't easily described in books. The coreography of "Fearless" for example would be hard to put in written form. I tend to read books for a more of an intellectual purpose. Just bought a book on teh roman empire. Looks really good

Well I wouldn't say American SciFi is that bad, people just stooped to "check" after 60th I think.
Try for example the "Leaden Universe series" by Sharon Lee and Steve (Sasha) Miller http://www.korval.com/ - one of the best things I read.

From older generation there is Andre Norton , Isaac Asimov etc...

Russian SciFi is also quite good but of course unknown to non-russian speakers.

sorry mystic, observation and statistical demogarphy aren't the same. you failed to consider one thing: that your 'science' based on observation lacks the systematicity of science. here's a counter-factual. many people only need to wear glasses for certain tasks like driving or reading. if you observe people only while they're reading books, you're therefore likley to observe a higher rate of people wearing glasses while reading. if you observe a general population throughout the course of a day, i think you might find an equal rate of people who wear glasses in both populations: i can't say without actually doing the study or working from a set of survey data with the appropriate questions. in any case, nothing about your observations discounts this counter-factual  



ahhh you've just touched on one of the primary observations behind "ethno-literacy" (a nickname made up by one of my professors for her own pet intrests, but there are corelate researchers in anthopology, linguistics, education studies, etc). anyway, it's the idea that (and study of) certain forms of marignalized literacy, including those treated as a given in a particular society and not considered real reading or writing because of their utilitarian value. if you can fill out a personal check faster and more legibly than 99.9% of people, does that make you a good writer? why or (presumably) why not? what's to say the "purest" form of writing isn't the first form - cuneiform - and the first use, which was to tabulate and track accounts and inventory. read any good financial reports lately?   



HEY! Frank Herbert was an American, and i think some of us are still trying to postumously exile Hubbard.

Take it from an aging bookworm / nerd with glasses - there is a correlation. But you are coming at it backwards.

My eyes are terrible and always have been. I can't drive without my glasses. I began reading as a kid because I was terrible at sports. I can't see a baseball coming at me to save my life. I got hooked on science fiction as a form of escapism, I think, and because I love the limitless possibilities.

When was the last time you saw an ex-jock bookworm? The stereotype has some truth - bookworms wear glasses and are nerdy. But we are bookworms because we wear glasses, not vice versa. And so the nerds become keepers of the arcane, sacred lore...

The geek shall inherit the Earth.

/Not an invitation to turn this into another religious thread. Thanks!

  



on the whole, a very nice causal mechanism, Oz.