bluesilverkdg | (no subject)

Current Mood: aggravated

(no subject)

So, let's say that I was inclined to start reading the Harry Potter series. Yes, I have finally succumbed to the masses. It only took a few years. Anyway..

Would it be wise to see the movies first, then read the books? Or should I read the books before seeing the movies? Typically, I get very disillusioned when seeing a movie that has been based on a book, especially if it's a book that I like a lot. Stephen King and his array of disappointing movies (Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile not included) springs to mind. I read Interview With the Vampire first, then saw the movie and was massively disappointed. Even Brad Pitt's prettiness couldn't save it, I thought. There are a few other examples, although I'm at a loss to remember them here. I was largely impressed by both the movie and book versions of Grisham's A Time To Kill, although the movie varied widely from the book. Still, they were both darned good.

I recently joined Goodreads, which I'm hoping will prompt me to get back into the habit of reading regularly. I used to devour books, but lately, that's not been the case, and I've gotta admit, I really miss curling up with a good book. Or even a bad book. So, join me there, if you wish, and motivate me to read more.

Back to my original question..Potter People, what might you recommend? I've been hesitant to undertake this series, but after being told by eleven billion people "you'll loooove them!", I guess I sort of feel compelled. At least it will keep me in the house and out of trouble..

In other news, I left a message for my massage therapist about getting in today. Fingers crossed that she has an opening. The back is no better, and I can barely move without screeching in pain. I need to take out trash and do a plethora of other things, but I'm thinking that's not going to happen when I can't even take a deep breath comfortably.

I've taken Flexeril and Darvocet until my head is a total fog and I can barely speak coherently. I've gone through a box and a half of Thermacare pads. Yet it still hurts this much. This just really, really sucks. And I'm craving M&Ms. Why? Probably because I don't have any.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Read the books. Don't ever see the movies. :)

Really? I've heard good things about both.

Cool...I'll add you. :-)

So, I'm getting that I need to read the books...

Read the books first, then see the movies.

The books get darker and more intense the further you get in the series.

My opinion won't matter at all because I absolutely HATE fantasy type writings and refuse to read those books. I only saw one of the movies because Cory forced me into going to the movie with him a few years ago.

But I like the idea of that website!!! I just joined it! You should be my friend. I think you can find me under siamesedream17@yahoo.com

If you're a reader, I recommend the books. They are rich food for your imagination. I have only seen the first two movies, because I prefer books over movies any day.

I will need to find you on Goodreads!

Read the books first.

The movies are good, but can be slightly confusing if you haven't read the books because the movies cut out important bits due to time.

Deinitely read the books first. :)

I usually read the books first (and did so both Harry Potter and Narnia); as others have pointed out, as the books got longer and longer, more little bits and details had to be chopped out to make the movies. Personally, I'd rather know the details up front and see how they adapted things to make the movies than the other way round.

I'm sorry you're still in pain; that sucks and you might have to get to a doctor and see what they can do.

Definitely read the books first.

Not that you need anyone else chiming in, but yes, books first, then the movies--just because there is SO MUCH to the books that just can't possibly get jammed into the movies. The movies, however, are great, and I enjoy seeing how they translate objects and ideas that are mostly sort of abstract descriptions in the book to the screen--very often I go "Yes, that's exactly how I thought that looked!"--which is something a lot of adaptations don't get right. Also, you have the excellent opportunity to watch them (and with the books, read them) in rapid succession, so you can really see how they start very child-like and progress to become darker and complex (just like the books, of course). I still can't watch the end of "Goblet of Fire" without sobbing.

Enjoy the reads, and let us know what you think! I resisted for years too, but I'm so glad I caved and read them, I love them!

The movies aren't bad, but still read the books first. There's just so much detail in the books there's no way they could fit it in the movies, esp. once they started making the movies not as long and the books that much longer. (Book 7 is going to be two movies because they realized they just couldn't cut it down that much).

This is one of the better book-to-movie adaptations I've seen. I'm usually really disappointed.

Sorry you're hurting so much. :(

Oh, read the books first! There are so many things that don't make it into the movies, especially the later ones as the books get darker and longer. The most recent movie (Order of the Phoenix) was disjointed and practically incomprehensible if you hadn't read the book. Not to say I don't enjoy the films, but you get much more out of seeing them if you already know the story.

Also, keep in mind that the series started out for a younger audience. I've heard a number of people complain about the first book, and I can understand that. (I actually read the fourth one first, after my "I hate reading!" little brother breezed through the 800 page monster in three days. Then I went back and started from the beginning.) The Sorcerer's/Philospher's Stone is probably the "youngest" of the bunch, if that makes any sense, with a lot of exposition and not a whole lot of action. After all, it has to lay the groundwork of the world in which this entire series takes place! So if you don't love it straight away, at least try the second or third book. The series builds upon itself and *mostly* gets better as it goes along. (Although the 4th was my favorite.)

You know, I am actually not a fan of fantasy, either, but I enjoyed the HP series. [Stupid LJ, taking an enter as a sign to post my comment when I wasn't finished. Grr.] Anyway, what I was going to say was that while I like the occasional scifi read/film - mostly of the dystopian or alternate history variety - I really don't like fantasy. Wizards and elves and magic and dragons and whatnot never really did it for me. But I found that HP is much more of a classic story and social commentary that happens to be wrapped in a wizard's cloak.

Edited 2008-08-05 15:25 (UTC)

AS a fan of both, read the books first. THere are things you'll understand more watching the movies after you read the book. They had to leave out a lot of details to condense the movies down, but they left in some, but no explanation to why things happened that way.

And really, the movies are good enough to follow the books in this case.

I was personally not a fan of the movies. There was just so much detail that was missed to me. You would get sooo much more from reading the books.

DEFINITELY read the books first.

Books first, then movie marathon :)

The movies are good in their own rights, but the books are better.

I haven't been able to get Kaity to read the HP books yet. OY.

I've got them all if you want to borrow 'em.

Gotcha! :-)

Yeah, that's what I've heard. I wonder if she did that intentionally since she was picking up more adult readers?

I sent you an add request. :-)

I normally don't enjoy fantasy stuff either, but this series seems to be deeper than that, so who knows. I'll give it a try!

Did David have the books? If I missed out when he was moving, I'll kick myself. :-P

I'm still waiting on a call from my massage therapist. Here's hoping she's free soon. :-/

I think one of the reasons that I've not liked movies adapted from books, is because they ARE forced to leave out so much pertinent information in the movies for time and clarity. I've also been disappointed with liberties that filmmakers take in adding things that were not even kind of in the book. So I usually just wind up angry after seeing a movie based on a book that I love. :-P From what I've heard though, the Potter movies are at least comparable to the books, although it sounds like I might be a bit lost just seeing the movies without having the books to go by. So...I'll read the books first.

I usually do, although in some cases, I've seen a movie before I knew it was based on a book.

I'm getting that! ;-)

I remember having students in 2000ish (whenever the first one came out) who were absolutely going nuts about HP, and while I was glad they were reading, I've gotta admit, I got a little sick of hearing about him. So I think that was one of the reasons I've resisted. But I've just heard so many people go on about how incredible these books are, and now I've got to see for myself.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Page 1 of 3