# Do you ever read the book AFTER seeing the movie?



## isaacsweeney (Jan 1, 2011)

I've done this a few times:

Silence of the Lambs
The Shining
First Blood
maybe some others. And the book was still better (and enjoyable).

How about you? Ever done this?


----------



## JFHilborne (Jan 22, 2011)

Yes, I've done this with a couple of books and always enjoy the book more than the movie.


----------



## Lyndl (Apr 2, 2010)

Yes, I've done it..  two that come to mind...

Firestarter
Silence of the Lambs
Sybil ( not a movie, but the book ruled)

I know there are others, I often see a movie and wonder if there's a book.


----------



## youngadultfiction (Jul 28, 2011)

I think i'm going to do this with 'Water for Elephants.' I saw the movie a few weeks ago and thought some of it was great and some of it was bad, but got the feeling that the 'good' parts were taken directly from the novel. Will have to wait and see!


----------



## isaacsweeney (Jan 1, 2011)

I just saw The Help. It was a powerful movie, but I bet the book was more powerful. Will read soon.


----------



## Lursa (aka 9MMare) (Jun 23, 2011)

All the time. They never go deep enough into some things, like the science or forensics behind something for ex, in movies. I dont mean action movies (which I love), but for sci-fi or thrillers or crime/homicide, etc.

I love the details.............

Speaking of this...does anyone remember the sci-fi book that Independence Day was based on?


----------



## KindleChickie (Oct 24, 2009)

I purchased Lovely Bones but never got around to reading it.  Then I saw the movie and it killed any interest I had in the book.  Hated the movie.


----------



## AliShams (Sep 7, 2011)

I think I will do this for the first time with "Lord of the rings".


----------



## derek alvah (Jul 2, 2010)

It's what I did with Harry Potter. Watched like the first 3 movies before ever reading one of the books. Watched all 3 Lord Of The Rings movies, still haven't read the books. Same with Jaws.


----------



## Elizabeth Black (Apr 8, 2011)

Yes, I've done it.

A Stir Of Echoes
The Bone Collector
Jaws
The Exorcist
Alien (The movie made more sense after reading the book.)
Uzumaki (Japanese horror. The manga was even more demented than the movie, and I didn't think that was possible.)
Curse of the Demon (based on "Casting The Runes" by M. R. James)


----------



## Tommie Lyn (Dec 7, 2009)

Yes.

The Outlaw Josey Wales

I saw the movie and years later found out about the book it was based on, which was originally titled _Gone To Texas_, so I read the book. It was the only time I've ever seen a movie that followed the book almost exactly, even down to the dialogue.

Novels are nearly impossible to render faithfully in a visual medium, so I was thoroughly impressed with Clint Eastwood's directorial abilities.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

I find that I rarely actually compare the book to the movie with any real expectations; they are two different media with different requirements. It would be like comparing orange marmalade to an orange...yes, the marmalade came from the orange, but they are hardly going to be the same.

That being said, if I have a choice (as I did recently with _The Help_), I prefer to read the book AFTER seeing the movie. Movies being time limited as they are, the movie can never contain everything that is in the book, no matter how faithful a rendering is made. So, I can see the movie and still be suprised by things in the book. My sister-in-law gifted a Kindle version of The Help in May...now that I've seen the movie, I'm settling down to enjoy the book. (I've talked to people who enjoyed the movie more than the book and others who enjoyed the book more; I'm reserving judgment.)

Many times, though, I've seen a movie and found that it came from a book, and then I seek out the book. It's always interesting for me to see the choices the director & screenwriter made in adapting a book.

Betsy


----------



## deckard (Jan 13, 2011)

I read Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep after seeing "Blade Runner."

It started me reading more Philip K. Dick.


----------



## GerrieFerrisFinger (Jun 1, 2011)

KindleChickie said:


> I purchased Lovely Bones but never got around to reading it. Then I saw the movie and it killed any interest I had in the book. Hated the movie.


On the general subject of reading the book after the movie. I do. I hate to watch a movie after the book because I know I'll be critical. Can't help myself. 
On Lovely Bones, I'm with you. I read the book, or tried to. It didn't make sense.


----------



## Beth Groundwater (Apr 6, 2011)

Yes, I most recently did this with The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. By seeing the movie first, I became fascinated by the characters, so I found the huge dump of backstory at the beginning of the book more interesting than many readers. They hadn't met the characters yet and became bored by it. So that's one instance where seeing the movie first made my experience of reading the book better.


----------



## youngadultfiction (Jul 28, 2011)

> I purchased Lovely Bones but never got around to reading it. Then I saw the movie and it killed any interest I had in the book. Hated the movie.


Totally agree!!! That was one of the worst movies ever. And could only read about half the book before i gave up.


----------



## Craig Allen (Apr 2, 2011)

I, too, saw Blade Runner before reading Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep.  Plus, I saw the Lord of the Rings movies before reading the books too.

Also, I saw the Hunt for Red October before I actually read it.  There's a little more in the book, as I recall, with only a few differences.  In the book, Jack Ryan actually aided in piloting the sub back to US over the course of days, not just during the battle sequence.


----------



## KindleChickie (Oct 24, 2009)

Beth Groundwater said:


> Yes, I most recently did this with The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. By seeing the movie first, I became fascinated by the characters, so I found the huge dump of backstory at the beginning of the book more interesting than many readers. They hadn't met the characters yet and became bored by it. So that's one instance where seeing the movie first made my experience of reading the book better.


I so want to get into The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, but I cannot seem to get past the first part of the book. I tried watching the movie too, but I have to be in a theater to sit still for a film. At home I got too much else going on.


----------



## ThomasSandman (Aug 10, 2011)

i did before i got into stephen king i watched misery and it and another one and i loved them enoguh to read his work.  i then realized his writing is even better than the movies lol.


----------



## Gabriel Beyers (Jan 28, 2011)

For me it was Interview with the Vampire, Harry Potter, and Lord of the Rings.


----------



## Christopher Hunter (Apr 11, 2011)

I did this with the latest Star Trek movie. The book was way way better. In the movie they cut things to the point it was reckless. Plus it was cool to get into the character's heads.


----------



## Cliff Ball (Apr 10, 2010)

The only one that comes to my mind at the moment is The Postman. Even though I enjoyed the movie, I liked the book a lot more.


----------



## KateEllison (Jul 9, 2011)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> I find that I rarely actually compare the book to the movie with any real expectations; they are two different media with different requirements. It would be like comparing orange marmalade to an orange...yes, the marmalade came from the orange, but they are hardly going to be the same.
> 
> That being said, if I have a choice (as I did recently with _The Help_), I prefer to read the book AFTER seeing the movie. Movies being time limited as they are, the movie can never contain everything that is in the book, no matter how faithful a rendering is made. So, I can see the movie and still be suprised by things in the book.
> 
> ...


Betsy, I think you and I might be soul mates. Kidding!! But seriously, this is my exact attitude on the subject.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

I've done it several times.  With a few exceptions I usually end up regretting it as reading a book is pretty boring if you know what happens already IMO.

Plus, I'm a much bigger movie fan than book fan personally, so that probably biases the equation for me.


----------



## MLPMom (Nov 27, 2009)

I have never done this and I don't think that will change. If I really want to see a movie but I also want to read the book, I will ALWAYS read the book first.
In fact one of my favorite authors, I have read all of their books except for the movies that I saw first. I know I would like the books, but I loved the movies and I don't now want to take away from them.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

Many times I've seen the movie _after_ reading the book, but the only ones I can recall seeing the movie first are:

Shutter Island - book and movie were both great
Three Days of the Condor - Like the movie a lot, only into the book about a chapter (DTB), so jury is still out
Brotherhood of the Rose - Liked the book a bit more
The Ninth Gate - the book was much more complex, they left more than half of it out
The Ghost and Mrs. Muir - Liked both movie and book a lot
Portrait of Jennie - liked the ending of the movie much more, but otherwise liked the book more.

There are probably others, but that's all that come to mind at the moment.

Mike


----------



## Ann Chambers (Apr 24, 2011)

Every so often I see a movie that spurs me to read the book after. Sometimes I hadn't heard of the book previously, but more often it's because I feel the book HAD to have discussed some interesting themes or characters in greater depths. So I run out and buy the book. And I'm always glad.

There's been some discussion comparing books to movies and being disappointed in one or the other. Made me think - the very best job adapting a book into a movie and maintaining all the important themes, characters, and the feeling of the book, IMO, was Fried Green Tomatoes. Fanny Flagg wrote the screenplay (or co-wrote it, I forget). And it captured the essence of the book beautifully. I wish more of the major authors would/could oversee the adaptation of their works.


----------



## AnnieOldham (Sep 1, 2011)

I always read the book first, because I don't like having the movie images in my head as I'm reading a book for the first time. I like to picture the characters and locations according to my own imagination, and not what someone else has dreamed up.


----------



## mish (Jun 27, 2011)

I absolutely have to read the book first.  If I see the movie first then I won't have any desire to pick up the book.


----------



## BRONZEAGE (Jun 25, 2011)

Read _To Kill A Mockingbird_ years after seeing the film,
and recall being glad for that 
because the narration is at times confusing in the novel but having seen it on the big screen it all made sense!


----------



## bordercollielady (Nov 21, 2008)

I prefer reading the book first since - most of the time for me - the book is better and they leave too much out of movies,  but I have often seen a movie about a subject I dont know much about and then looked for a book about that subject.  Still trying to find a good "Kindle"  book related to the "King's Speech"..


----------



## Scott Daniel (Feb 1, 2011)

Bridges of Madison County


----------



## scl (Feb 19, 2011)

AnnieOldham said:


> I always read the book first, because I don't like having the movie images in my head as I'm reading a book for the first time. I like to picture the characters and locations according to my own imagination, and not what someone else has dreamed up.


For me it's just the opposite. Once I've read the book I have an image in my mind of how everyone looks. If I then go see the movie and the actors don't match the images in my head from the book it makes me crazy. If I see the movie first, the images in my head are set and I attach them to the characters in the book. Everything then matches fine and I can enjoy the book.


----------



## W.W. (Jun 27, 2011)

I don't think I've ever read the book after seeing the movie. It ruins the story for me if I know the ending. In fact, I'm always disappointed when I watch a good movie with a great story line, then find out it was a book first. I always wish I'd read it first.

And I'm the only person I know who's only seen the first Harry Potter movie, but read all the books. I saw the movie after reading the book, and the characters weren't what I imagined. I liked the images in my head better.


----------



## Lursa (aka 9MMare) (Jun 23, 2011)

KindleChickie said:


> I purchased Lovely Bones but never got around to reading it. Then I saw the movie and it killed any interest I had in the book. Hated the movie.


Heh, opposite for me...read the book, hated it. Didnt watch the movie.


----------



## Lursa (aka 9MMare) (Jun 23, 2011)

Craig Allen said:


> Also, I saw the Hunt for Red October before I actually read it. There's a little more in the book, as I recall, with only a few differences. In the book, Jack Ryan actually aided in piloting the sub back to US over the course of days, not just during the battle sequence.


See, that's a very good example...I liked the movie alot, but preferred the book...all the technology, strategy, tactics explained. Great details. I dont remember what order I saw/read those in tho.


----------



## Lursa (aka 9MMare) (Jun 23, 2011)

GerrieFerrisFinger said:


> On the general subject of reading the book after the movie. I do. I hate to watch a movie after the book because I know I'll be critical. Can't help myself.
> On Lovely Bones, I'm with you. I read the book, or tried to. It didn't make sense.


I _know _ that movies will never live up to the books, but whether I see the movie before or after reading the book...I really like getting the visuals of people and locations. And it never bothers me if they are very different than what I pictured from the books. (Altho sometimes I get annoyed at the actors cast in certain roles sometimes.)


----------



## Stephen_Melling (Jun 26, 2011)

The Howling, by Gary Brandner
The Empire Strikes Back, novel by...Donald Glut??
Silence of the Lambs...

Probably more but can't think of them off-hand.


----------



## Guest (Sep 12, 2011)

Jaws and The Godfather come to mind. I was very surprised in both cases by how different the films were to the books.

One book that didn't disappoint was Dava Sobel's Longitude, which I picked up after seeing the miniseries (also called Longitude). The book and the two-parter were both excellent.


----------



## deckard (Jan 13, 2011)

wordwrestler said:


> I liked the images in my head better.


Ah, yes. The theater of the mind.


----------



## Michael Cargill (Sep 12, 2011)

Interesting topic this.  I don't think I have ever specifically set out to read the book after watching a film.  In fact the only one that I can think of that I have done this to is Jurassic Park.

I couldn't believe how different it was.


----------



## Cliff Ball (Apr 10, 2010)

Craig Allen said:


> I, too, saw Blade Runner before reading Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. Plus, I saw the Lord of the Rings movies before reading the books too.
> 
> Also, I saw the Hunt for Red October before I actually read it. There's a little more in the book, as I recall, with only a few differences. In the book, Jack Ryan actually aided in piloting the sub back to US over the course of days, not just during the battle sequence.


I actually did a book report on the differences between the Hunt for Red October book and movie back when I was in junior high sometime after the movie came out. My English teacher, who hadn't read the book or even seen the movie, decided to do both after that.


----------



## Lursa (aka 9MMare) (Jun 23, 2011)

Michael Cargill said:


> Interesting topic this. I don't think I have ever specifically set out to read the book after watching a film. In fact the only one that I can think of that I have done this to is *Jurassic Park*.
> 
> I couldn't believe how different it was.


Another great example of how the genetic details in the book added so much more, yet the visuals...and the sounds....of the movie were excellent, I just loved the roar of the T-Rex...neva could have replicated that in my miind!


----------



## patrickt (Aug 28, 2010)

I'm getting ready to. I saw Burt Lancaster in "Valdez is Coming" which was written by Elmore Leonard and it's at the top of my TBR list.


----------



## robertk328 (Jul 8, 2011)

I wanted to read Lincoln Lawyer when I saw the book on the daily deal but figured without the suspense it wouldn't be as good. Really liked the movie...


----------



## CollinKelley (Sep 1, 2011)

More than I care to say, actually. lol The one that stands out is Silence of the Lambs, although I think they did a brilliant job translating that book to screen. Rarely do a movie and book complement each other, but in that case they do. However, Hannibal on the other hand -- the less said the better.


----------



## Iain Edward Henn (Jan 29, 2011)

Yes, but not usually as extreme as this example:
Over ten years ago I watched an epic, seven hour French language (with English subtitles) tv miniseries of 'The Count Of Monte Cristo,' (it starred Gerard Depardieu, who it seems as though has been in every French film and miniseries ever made) and I loved every minute of it, one of the best I have ever seen. I've always wanted to read the original Alexandre Dumas novel, but thought I'd never get around to it. Then, last year I bought and read the Penguin Classics version (translated by Robin Buss) and could not put it down.

http://www.amazon.com/Count-Cristo-Penguin-Classics-ebook/dp/B002RI9KL8/ref=sr_1_1_title_0_main?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1315917493&sr=1-1

Well worth the indulgence. It's approx 1200 pages and I still didn't want it to end when I finally got there.


----------



## Tony Lee (Sep 9, 2011)

Funny enough I've had both options in the last week.

As a fan of ONE DAY, I've been interested to see the film, but my wife hasn't read the book yet, and I think she'd get more from the film if she knew the original story. That said, I was lucky enough to go with her to a preview of TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY last night, another book she hasn't read, and I think it probably helped her, as there has been some serious reshuffling to make the film work in the length that is has...


----------



## Bigal-sa (Mar 27, 2010)

I re-read 'War of the Worlds' after watching the movie, just to make sure that I hadn't read a different book to the script writer.


----------



## Linda Andrews (Aug 16, 2011)

I remember reading Jurassic Park after watching the movie, then I read more of his books and couldn't watch the movies. I find that I go back and reread classics that I read when I was younger after watching the movie--Journey to the Center of the Earth, Lost World, and War of the Worlds to name a few. Rarely, will I do so now especially if I enjoy the movie. 

Linda


----------



## Todd Trumpet (Sep 7, 2011)

Read the book after the movie?

Many times.

This includes contemporary fiction (e.g., "SILENCE OF THE LAMBS", as several others have noted) plus quite a few classics. This is mostly due to the fact that the classic movie versions were far more accessible to me as a child than the prose would have been. Examples include "MOBY DICK", "THE ADVENTURES OF HUCKLEBERRY FINN", "OLIVER", "THE THREE MUSKETEERS", and even "BAMBI" (and that's just scratching the surface).

However, as an adult, one classic movie/book combo stands out: "SENSE AND SENSIBILITY".

I had already read some Jane Austen ("PRIDE AND PREJUDICE", "EMMA") and liked it, so I tried "SENSE AND SENSIBILITY".

Couldn't get through it.

Found it dense and confusing and a slog. CUT TO: 1995. The movie version starring Emma Thompson is released.

And, IMO, is the finest costume/period/historical movie ever put on film.

I loved it so much, in fact, that it inspired me to return to the book. And this time I got through, even managing to appreciate Ms. Austen's efforts. But the writer who I REALLY gained respect for was--

Emma Thompson.

Not because she starred as Elinor Dashwood in the 1995 film, _but because she wrote the screenplay for the adaptation._

And, IMO, actually streamlined and improved the story.

When I first learned that Ms. Thompson had won the Oscar for Best Screenplay Adaptation for her work, it was before I had tried to reread the book, and my first reaction was one of dismissal, "Sure, another example of a celebrity being given a screenplay Oscar because of name recognition." But after returning to and reading "SENSE AND SENSIBILITY"...

You earned it, Ms. Thompson.

So, sometimes at least, movies and books can really work in harmony.

Todd


----------



## KindleChickie (Oct 24, 2009)

I read the book Falling Angel by William Hjortson(sp) after seeing the movie Angel Heart.  The movie is one of my top favorites.  I book was very good, but I liked the movie better.

There have been many times I will go looking to see if a movie came from a book after seeing it.  I just dont remember them all.


----------



## Tara Maya (Nov 4, 2010)

I've done both.

What I wonder is if people who prefer the book / movie do so because its the first exposure to the story and if the read/saw the movie/book first, if they would change their minds.


----------



## Iain Edward Henn (Jan 29, 2011)

Todd, good point. I'm going to go and check out Sense andd Sensibility, the movie and the book.
I believe movie adaptions can play a part in driving an audience to check out the book, and particularly where the classics are involved.
I've seen many verions of HG Wells tales since I was a kid, but recently decided I really wanted to go back and either read, or re-read, the original works, and have now read 'The Time Machine,' and 'The War Of The Worlds,' and 'The Invisible Man,' as a result.

I don't usually mind a modern film version streamlining aspects of the story, it's an adaption after all and a different medium (and a different audeince in a different era) but of course it's a subjective thing, and it doesn't always do justice to he original.


----------



## isaacsweeney (Jan 1, 2011)

Sometimes I'm really surprised when I find out a movie is based on a book. I remember finding out years later that Die Hard was based on a novel by Roderick Thorp. I didn't know for a long time that First Blood was a novel by David Morrell (and pretty great novel at that). Phillip K. Dick may be my favorite author whom I've never read (because of Blade Runner, Minority Report, Total Recall, etc.).


----------



## Iain Edward Henn (Jan 29, 2011)

Isaac, like you I'd seen many films based on Phillip K Dick stories but hadn't read him. Until now. Many of those films, Minority Report and Paycheck for example , are based on PKD's short stories, so it's a great place to start. (The short stories are often quite different to what ended up on the screen but they more than stand up in their own right) Recently I've been reading Minority Report and Other Stories. Great storyteller.

http://www.amazon.com/Minority-Report-Other-Classic-Stories/dp/0806523794/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1316057303&sr=1-1


----------



## Not Here (May 23, 2011)

Pride & Prejudice was the first. Who wouldn't after Colin Firth as Darcy.

More recently was The City of Ember. I liked the movie and wanted it to see what the book was like. So glad I did since there were some interesting changes.


----------



## Gabriel Beyers (Jan 28, 2011)

I'm thinking of reading Fried Green Tomatoes.  I loved the movie.  The book can only be better.


----------



## Thalia the Muse (Jan 20, 2010)

I'm reading Midnight Cowboy right now -- I had no idea that it WAS a book until it popped up as a discounted title for Kindle!


----------



## Iwritelotsofbooks (Nov 17, 2010)

Usually the movie is so bad it turns me off of the book.


----------



## Todd Young (May 2, 2011)

I can't think of a time when I've done it. I don't think I have ever read the book after seeing the movie. Then again, I don't watch movies a whole lot. I prefer books.


----------



## Michelle Muto (Feb 1, 2011)

The Rite, by Matt Baglio.

I'm calling it a tie, but only because I'm such a fan of Sir Anthony Hopkins.


----------



## KindleChickie (Oct 24, 2009)

Thalia the Muse said:


> I'm reading Midnight Cowboy right now -- I had no idea that it WAS a book until it popped up as a discounted title for Kindle!


Me either. I think I might have to read it.

Right now I am on the fence about buying the book that inspired the two Straw Dogs movies. I went to see the new one with Alexander Skarsgard (Eric from True Blood). The book is The Seige of Trencher's Farm by Gordon Williams

http://www.amazon.com/Siege-Trenchers-Farm-Straw-ebook/dp/B004FGMPAS/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1317178814&sr=1-1


----------



## JackDAlbrecht (Sep 24, 2011)

I have done this more times than I can count. I usually do this with series movies. I tend to like the movies a lot, then get 2/3 of the way through the movies, find myself unable to wait, so I start reading from the beginning because books are so much better and I want to see what I have missed. (big breath now)

The Lord of the Rings: The books were SO much better, but the movies were great.
I, Robot: Once again, the book was better, but the movie was great.
Harry Potter: Watched up to movie 5, then read all the books, loved most of the movies. (the last three just angered me. if felt like they were making fun of all of the fans that loved the movies, rather than being serious about making a good movie.)
Silence of the Lambs: Book was better, but LOVED the movie.

The list could go on all night, but the last thing I want to do is hijack the thread.


----------



## ArtMayo (Sep 13, 2011)

I read the first half of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier Spy before seeing the film, and the second half afterwards. (Through sheer incompetence in making space to finish it in time.)

A very odd experiment. I enjoyed the book before and after seeing it. But the second half of the film was much better without having read it. (Partly because of the numerous and often unnecessary changes it makes.)


----------



## Alexis-Shore (Feb 20, 2011)

Does reading David Simon's Homicide after seeing the show and The Wire count?


----------



## Grace Elliot (Mar 14, 2011)

Not usually, but once I did after seeing the Roman Polanski version of 'Tess of the D'urbevilles'  (1980's I think) I was so moved I gave Thomas Hardy a go and loved it. From there I went on to read 'Far from the Madding Crowd' - which was beautiful and found an author who I came to love but had previously thought dull and impenetrable.


----------



## rmbooks (Sep 19, 2011)

Yep... I've done it.  The first three Harry Potter books I read after the movies.  After that, I was hooked and read the others as soon as they were released.  I read Jurassic Park after I saw the movie.  It got me hooked on Michael Crichton.  I've also read a few Stephen King books after the movies.  Always prefer the books... in all cases


----------



## Todd Trumpet (Sep 7, 2011)

Several have mentioned the "HARRY POTTER" books and movies, so I thought I'd add my personal experience.

_I purposely avoided the "HARRY POTTER" movies_ until I was done reading all the books.

Why? Because I didn't want the movie images - choices other people had made about the way characters/places/things should look - playing in my head while I read. I wanted them to be from my own imagination first.

This proved to be difficult to do in practice. It was almost impossible to avoid every commercial and movie trailer during the run of the movies, and by the time the 7th book came out, I already knew every major casting choice.

But I stuck to my plan. Read all 7 books as they came out...

...then finally sat down to watch the first movie.

And was disappointingly unimpressed.

Some of the casting was spot on (Hermione) and some of the production design was fantastic (the dining hall), but overall, the movie felt like a too mechanical flattening of the book.

I skipped movies #2-#7...

...but I did see the last "HARRY POTTER" movie (# with my nieces the week it opened.

Eh.

Better, I suppose, in some ways to the first, but it felt overly dark, serious - and oppressive - to me (the desaturation alone was enough to put one in a Scandinavian winter mood).

I also have some real issues with the "necessity" of breaking the last book up into two movies - namely, I don't think it _was _necessary (there were longer books in the series that apparently did just fine as single movies).

I think it was purely a money grab.

And it's the only time I've ever been disappointed in J.K. Rowling (yes, she could have countermanded Warner Brothers if she had wanted to).

In any case, that's my book-to-movie experience with "HARRY POTTER".

I'm glad I read the books first, exclusive of the movies.

Todd


----------



## balaspa (Dec 27, 2009)

I loved the movie Drive and have been very tempted to download the book now that I have seen the movie.


----------



## Thalia the Muse (Jan 20, 2010)

Sometimes the movie IS better than the book. I read Sideways because I liked the movie so much, and I thought the book was lousy. Also Jaws and The Godfather were brilliant films, and time-killer books.

Midnight Cowboy, OTOH, is an excellent book. But OMG, so depressing! I mean, I'm not surprised, but it is so relentlessly bleak.


----------



## yingko2 (Jul 26, 2011)

I actually did that with Star Wars. I liked the movie so much as a teen I immediately went out and bought the book, and a couple others in the series. I ended up preferring the movie in that case. Did the same with the horror movie Magic that starred Anthony Hopkins. The book was pretty good, though I loved the movie. I tried it with Martin Caiden's Cyborg, upon which the Six Million Dollar Man was based, though, and could not get through the book for some reason.
Cheers,
Howard


----------



## AnnaPV (Sep 28, 2011)

Revolutionary Road - Great Movie, but better book because you get inside Frank's Head


----------



## Alexis-Shore (Feb 20, 2011)

Seeing the Michael Crichton thread reminded me that I read Jurassic Park after seeing the movie. Was hooked on his work after that.

Silence of the Lambs too.

There's bound to be many others.


----------



## Simon Haynes (Mar 14, 2011)

I always read the book first. I like to have the author's world & characters firmly in my head before seeing how they were chopped, diced and butchered on screen.


----------



## brianrowe (Mar 10, 2011)

Yeah, actually I find myself reading books after seeing a movie or TV show more often than before. I finally got around to watching Game of Thrones on HBO and found myself intrigued enough to order George R.R. Martin's first four books in a boxed set. The main problem obviously is trying not to think of the actors in the filmed version while reading the book. I find it next to impossible now, for example, to look at the Harry Potter books and not think of the actors in the movies.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Not very often, but I didn't get around to reading _Atonement_ until after I saw the movie.


----------



## lib2b (Apr 6, 2010)

I can go either way with either reading or watching first. I tend to prefer watching the movie first because I feel like I have a greater chance of enjoying the movie if I'm not comparing it to the book.  In most cases, if I've read a book before seeing the movie, it was only because when I read the book there wasn't a movie yet.


----------



## Nessa Quill (Jul 16, 2011)

Being a huge movie fanatic, absolutely.


Lord of the Rings
Twilight _(the movie was better)_
Chronicles of Narnia
The Color Purple
All of Jane Austen
Pretty much all of William Shakespeare
Game of Thrones _(not a movie, but I thought it would still apply)_

There's more I could add to this list, but there's a movie on.


----------



## Mark Young (Dec 13, 2010)

Confession time. ... I just did that. I've like many of John Grisham's novels over the years ...more of his earlier novels than more recent ones. I never read his very first novel, A TIME TO KILL. Loved the movie, and saw it many times. So, I finally found an old hardback copy in a used book store. I really got caught up in the story, even thought I knew how everything was going to turn out. It just proved to me again, movies can only provide a two-dimensional part to the story, where the novel can share the mind of the characters with the reader.


----------



## emilyward (Mar 5, 2011)

The Princess Bride
The Secret Life of Bees
The Prestige
The Joy Luck Club
Shutter Island
Lord of the Rings

I don't like _comparing_ books and movies because, like Betsy said, they're two completely different mediums. But I do like analyzing what made the switch to film and what didn't. I have a few blog posts about this and I need to keep up on it!


----------



## Robert Appleton (Oct 31, 2010)

Another classics convert here. Jules Verne in particular--20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and Journey to the Center of the Earth (both starring James Mason) had a huge impact on me, inspired me to read the books. I now read Victorian adventures more than any other genre.

The BBC TV miniseries of Brideshead Revisited also intrigued me to read the Waugh novel, which is just as stunning.

Liked Crichton's Jurassic Park, too, after seeing the movie. They complement each other well.


----------



## B Regan Asher (Jun 14, 2011)

MLPMom said:


> I have never done this and I don't think that will change. If I really want to see a movie but I also want to read the book, I will ALWAYS read the book first.
> In fact one of my favorite authors, I have read all of their books except for the movies that I saw first. I know I would like the books, but I loved the movies and I don't now want to take away from them.


Ditto. I find that seeing the movie first taints the book.


----------



## MachineTrooper (Jun 22, 2010)

With few exceptions, that's the best way to do it IMO.


----------



## SteveScaffardi (Sep 6, 2011)

I have done this with a few books actually. I ended up reading The Godfather, The Bourne Identity, and Stephen King's The Body (Stand By Me) and the Shawshank Redemption (both were short stories in King's novella Four Seasons).

I wished I had read The Godfather and The Bourne Identity before seeing the films as the books were so much better. Stand By Me and Shawshank Redemption were actually better as films I felt.

But the worst one has to be Papillon - the film starring Steve McQueen and Dustin Hoffman. The book was a million times better!


----------



## normcowie (Jun 21, 2011)

I.Just. Can't.  I'm sure the books are better than the movies, but something just won't let me.


----------



## Marie S (May 20, 2011)

Yeah, quite often. Interview with The Vampire, Gone With The Wind, True Blood, The Thorn Birds are just a few. However, often when I watch a movie or adaptation of a novel that I've read I'm usually disappointed.


----------



## Louie Flann (Aug 3, 2011)

Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil. I saw the movie twice and really loved it. Then I read the book. It just didn't convey the warm neighborhood feeling that I got from the movie.


----------



## RichardSutton (Aug 21, 2011)

MY most recent, and expensive case of post-film reading began the day after the last episode of HBOs A Game of Thrones aired. I hadn't read any GRR Martin since the late 70s, so I bought the first book in hardbound so I could savor it and two months and a total of 3,969 pages later, I'm still hungry for Westeros! I posted a long review of the entire series with no spoilers on sailletales.com last week. The books were clearly more absorbing than the HBO version -- my wife claimed I was dull and unresponsive for weeks -- but in HBO's defence, the fidelity to the printed word was very good, and having images of at least the initial Main Characters made reading the series more interesting for me and more immediate. Now, I just don't know where I'm going to keep almost 15 pounds of paper and ink...


----------



## Jon Olson (Dec 10, 2010)

I rarely do this, but after seeing Moneyball, I'm going to read the book, to understand the math details better.


----------



## Juliette Sobanet (Oct 8, 2011)

I'm doing this with The Help. Just saw the film, and now I have to read the book . . . even though I'd planned on doing it the other way around. On a rare occasion, watching the movie first makes me more excited to read the book because I get attached to the characters on screen and want to read more details about them in the book.


----------



## N S Cooke (Sep 27, 2011)

The Da Vinci Code - hated the movie, LOVED the book. I went on to read Dan Brown's 'Angels and Demons.'

Rule of thumb, if they make a movie because the book was a hit - read the book.

Nick


----------



## Mo Ibrahim (Aug 24, 2011)

I just did that! I watched the film _Candy _and then read _Candy_ by Terry Southern, and I must say the film should be avoided, but if you MUST watch the film, the book should be read first - otherwise, you'll miss a lot of innuendos.

On the other hand, I watched _The Tenants_ before reading Bernard Malamud's novel of the same and they were both awesome!


----------



## JamesHutchings (Feb 27, 2011)

I, too, read _Silence of the Lambs_ after (and because of) the movie.

I also read _Noah's Castle_, a grim British science fiction novel, after seeing the TV series.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

B Regan Asher said:


> Ditto. I find that seeing the movie first taints the book.





Juliette Sobanet said:


> I'm doing this with The Help. Just saw the film, and now I have to read the book . . . even though I'd planned on doing it the other way around. On a rare occasion, watching the movie first makes me more excited to read the book because I get attached to the characters on screen and want to read more details about them in the book.


I'm reading The Help now after seeing the movie. Did it intentionally, my sister-in-law gifted me the Kindle version well before I saw the movie. I prefer to read the books after the movie versions, in most cases, as it allows me to enjoy (or not) the movie on its own merits as a movie and not as an adaptation. Also, since inevitably, given the time restrictions of a movie, things must be left out of a book, reading the book second allows me to be surprised by new stuff--it's like not knowing the story and learning new details. This works for me, anyway!

Betsy


----------



## TerryS (Mar 29, 2011)

I did that with Davinci Code.


----------



## FranShaff (Apr 26, 2011)

Gone With the Wind--loved the movie, loved the book more
Pollyanna--loved the movie, liked the book
Christmas Box--loved the movie, didn't care for the book
Wuthering Heights--loved the book, movie okay
Jane Eyre--loved the book, didn't care for the movie

Those are the ones off the top of my head. Most times I like the book more than the movie--but, you never know so indulge in both!


----------



## JamesHutchings (Feb 27, 2011)

I actually read and enjoyed _Battlefield Earth_ years before the movie came out. But I still didn't see the movie.


----------



## Amy Corwin (Jan 3, 2011)

Well, I actually did the reverse. 
I'd been considering reading "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo" but was a little nervous about it because I generally don't like bestsellers, plus there was a warning about violence. Now some violence I can take, other, not so much. I don't mind a shot to the head. Neat, quick. Don't like torture.

So I saw the movie and I'm glad I didn't buy the books because there were some scenes in the movie that would have been too much for me if described in a book. I figured the movie was graphic enough and they did the "cut away" when it got really bad, leaving you knowing what was happening but not really seeing it. Which was fine by me. In fact, I wish they hadn't shown what they did. But I'm assuming the violent bits were actually described in the book.

In this case, the movie made me glad I hadn't bought the book. It would have been to much for me.

I've seen movies in the distant past that did make me buy the books--e.g. the Thin Man movies with William Powell and Mryna Loy. (SP?) A few others...


----------



## N. Gemini Sasson (Jul 5, 2010)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> I'm reading The Help now after seeing the movie. Did it intentionally, my sister-in-law gifted me the Kindle version well before I saw the movie. I prefer to read the books after the movie versions, in most cases, as it allows me to enjoy (or not) the movie on its own merits as a movie and not as an adaptation. Also, since inevitably, given the time restrictions of a movie, things must be left out of a book, reading the book second allows me to be surprised by new stuff--it's like not knowing the story and learning new details. This works for me, anyway!
> 
> Betsy


Never thought of it that way, but those are good points, Betsy. My daughter and I both read The Other Boleyn Girl and then saw the movie and we kept scratching our heads at the parts they skipped. In all fairness, it was kind of a long book.

This thread reminds me that I keep meaning to read The Lovely Bones.


----------



## Iain Edward Henn (Jan 29, 2011)

This is a little different - I read the book (twice), watched 2 different tv miniseries versions of the book, then read the book again.
Admittedly, all of this happened over a 30 plus year period.

The book - The Day Of The Triffids, by John Wyndham.

Read it when I was 12 - a copy in the high school library. Three years later it was one of the study texts in my English class, read it again.
Watched - and very much enjoyed- an early 80's tv miniseries of the book. Close to 30 years later watched - enjoyed - the 2009 tv miniseries remake. Then read the book again, and I'm glad to say it held up in every way.


----------



## Jon Olson (Dec 10, 2010)

isaacsweeney said:


> I've done this a few times:
> 
> Silence of the Lambs
> The Shining
> ...


Yeah, I'm reading Moneyball now after seeing the movie. Book is better, I think.


----------



## Stephen T. Harper (Dec 20, 2010)

Planet of the Apes.  Good book.  Great movie, but the book is still a little better.  The book had a cool book-end opening and finish where the entire story was a message in a bottle floating in space (not a spoiler).  But the movie's Statue of Liberty ending was better (spoiler! but surely you've heard by now .

The book is almost always better, except for "Jaws."  Great movie.  The book was great only for the first 2 pages (the shark swimming).  Down hill pretty fast after that.  The changes to the story, often made on the fly WHILE THEY WERE FILMING are very surprisingly much better than the book.


----------



## SandraMiller (May 10, 2011)

I am ashamed to admit this--but I saw the first movie in the Lord of the Rings trilogy before reading the books.  Then I read through them all before the second movie came out.    But somewhere in school I had conflated Lord of the Rings and Lord of the Flies, and didn't think I wanted to read it...

Boy was I wrong.  The books were better.  But the movies were awesome too.


----------



## bjscript (Oct 26, 2011)

I saw the movie based on Hannibal (sequel to Silence of the Lambs), then read the book. I thought the movie had a better, more dramatic ending, but the book did a better job of conveying how Hannibal and Clarice were in each others thoughts. In the movie, it felt like two separate tracks finally came together toward the end.

Bill


----------



## bjscript (Oct 26, 2011)

KindleChickie said:


> I so want to get into The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, but I cannot seem to get past the first part of the book. I tried watching the movie too, but I have to be in a theater to sit still for a film. At home I got too much else going on.


The first book really gets into why the reporter is doing what he's doing, which takes a while to set up. The movies tend to gloss over a central point of the books, the girl becoming able to be in an intimate relationship with a man after all her abuse. Makes the movies more plot centric.

Bill


----------



## ThomasSandman (Aug 10, 2011)

legends of the fall.  saw the movie and loved it.  read the book (novella) and hated it.


----------



## evanlavine (Oct 4, 2011)

There are quite a few books I would not have known about if it weren't for the movie:
A Simple Plan
Thumbsucker
The Virgin Suicides
hell, even Deliverance...


----------



## BTackitt (Dec 15, 2008)

Stephen King's 
THE MIST
Saw the movie when it came out... read it last month.. the movie stuck pretty true to the story, with some minor changes. One major change which I actually think was an improvement.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Saw the movie The Big Year yesterday and really enjoyed it. (Stars Steve Martin, Jack Black & Owen Wilson.) Remembered I bought the book a couple of years ago and hadn't read it yet, so I'll be reading that soon. My first non-Kindle book in a while.


Betsy


----------



## Darlene Jones (Nov 1, 2011)

Only once a very long time ago. I read The Sound of Music and was disappointed. That was one time the movie was much better. Darlene Jones, Author


----------



## jwest (Nov 14, 2011)

I watched the original The Shining several times before I read Stephen King's book. For different reasons, I liked both, but I probably have to lean more toward the book for overall entertainment value.


----------



## tinytoy (Jun 15, 2011)

I had to think about this and the only one I can come up with is Bridget Jones's Diary. Actually, I saw the movie, then read the book sequel and then went back and read the first book.  This was many years ago.

I would like to read The Shining after seeing the movie many times but keep wimping out.  I read at night just before going to bed and think this might be too much. 

There are a few books I've read that I have yet to see the movie adaptation of including The Help, Water for Elephants and The Lincoln Lawyer. I *will* see The Hunger Games when it's released next Spring even if I have to take time off of work and go alone.  

I actually liked The Lovely Bones (book), but I read it in my early twenties so who knows if I'd enjoy it as much today.  I've never seen the movie.


----------



## robertk328 (Jul 8, 2011)

The book _The Shining_ is way better than the [Kubrick] movie....


----------



## Meka (Sep 8, 2011)

I saw "She Devil" starring Roseanne many years ago, just read the book a couple months ago, IMO the movie was better.

I just saw "The Lincoln Lawyer" which I enjoyed and now look forward to reading the series. 

I read "The Help" first then saw the movie, I enjoyed the movie but I enjoyed the book a little more. 

I have never read a Stephen King book but I have seen several movies that I enjoyed but didn't know were based on books he had written (ie Misery, Carrie, Cujo etc.), so I added the books to my wish list, hoping I will enjoy them even more.


----------



## KristieCook (Jan 25, 2011)

KindleChickie said:


> I purchased Lovely Bones but never got around to reading it. Then I saw the movie and it killed any interest I had in the book. Hated the movie.


The movie was horrible and only vaguely represented the book. The story itself could make an okay movie, I guess, but what makes the book awesome can't be shown visually. I hope you give the book a try.


----------



## KristieCook (Jan 25, 2011)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> if I have a choice (as I did recently with _The Help_), I prefer to read the book AFTER seeing the movie. ... It's always interesting for me to see the choices the director & screenwriter made in adapting a book.
> 
> Betsy


I wonder how the movie affects our imaginations, though, when we read after. We have specific faces, voices, even clothes to go with the characters. We've been shown the setting. We'd never know because now that we've seen it, we're already influenced. I find this particularly annoying with actors I don't like. If I read the book after seeing the movie and don't like the actor who played the hero, I already have this negative vibe for the person I'm supposed to fall in love with. This is probably why I don't read many books after seeing the movie - my love for reading is based a lot on how I use the author's words to create my own movie in my mind. When it's already been created, it's lost a lot of attraction for me.


----------



## DwayneRussell (Mar 26, 2011)

To answer the question: I guess I never really thought about it.  For me, novels and films are both art forms, and I don't much concern myself with the order. The only exception to this policy that comes to mind: I read Starship Troopers before seeing the film on the advice of a friend, who said that the character of the book would never be captured in the film. Truer words were never spoken.

I will quite frequently see a movie of a book I'm not sure I want to read, however.



KristieCook said:


> ...I don't read many books after seeing the movie - my love for reading is based a lot on how I use the author's words to create my own movie in my mind. When it's already been created, it's lost a lot of attraction for me.


Interesting reaction, Kristie. I guess I've never really had this problem. I can watch the movie Carrie a half dozen times, for example, then return and pick up the book...and it's the same experience I had before, which is nothing like the film at all.

Tell me -- I've always been curious to find someone else who admits to creating movies from their text -- do you find yourself frequently casting your friends, or other people you know?


----------



## Debra Purdy Kong (Apr 1, 2009)

I did this with Fried Green Tomatoes at the Whistle Stop Cafe. I loved the movie and loved the book even more


----------



## George Hamilton (Dec 14, 2010)

I did this with Cormac McCarthy's No Country for Old Men, and whilst I enjoyed both, I thought the story suited the format of a film better.


----------



## purplepen79 (May 6, 2010)

KristieCook said:


> I wonder how the movie affects our imaginations, though, when we read after. We have specific faces, voices, even clothes to go with the characters. We've been shown the setting. We'd never know because now that we've seen it, we're already influenced.


If you want a weird experience (at least it was weird for me), be sure to read _A Clockwork Orange _ before you see Stanley Kubrick's version of the same. I read the book before I saw the movie, and it messed with my head because what I pictured when I read the book was so radically different from Kubrick's vision. I don't think it would have been at all the same if I had seen the movie first because then I would have been picturing it while I read the book.

I love the movie version of _A Room with A View_. I saw it before I tried to read the book, and I've never been able to get into the book because I loved the movie so much.


----------



## jherrick (Apr 1, 2011)

I'm reading "Beaches" right now, saw the movie years ago. The first chapter matches the movie closely, but as of the halfway point in the book, the rest looks like a complete departure.


----------



## Trilby (Jul 26, 2009)

*The Mill River Recluse*


----------



## RoyHobbs (Nov 22, 2011)

I watched the first season of Game of Thrones and then read the book.

It was kind of nice having images of the characters already in my head!

----------------

On the other hand, I read Stephen King's Dolores Claiborne and pictured Kathy Bates as Dolores throughout the whole read.

Since Kathy Bates ending up being cast in this role in the movie version, I assume others pictured her perfect for the role as well!


----------



## pitbullandfire (Nov 27, 2011)

I want to read the Harry Potter series but they won't put it in e-reader form. I don't want to buy dead tree books.  I'll shut up now cause I thinks it's asinine that she had prolonged this to happen.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Joseph_Evans (Jul 24, 2011)

I read The Lord of the Rings before seeing the films, but you know what? As sacrilegious as it sounds I actually enjoyed the films more! This is because they cut out the colossal amount of politics and history of Middle Earth and focused just on the current story. The books were fantastic, but I don't think I needed to know all that information.


----------



## KristieCook (Jan 25, 2011)

DwayneRussell said:


> Tell me -- I've always been curious to find someone else who admits to creating movies from their text -- do you find yourself frequently casting your friends, or other people you know?


No, not really. Only if a character comes really close to someone I know, but I can't think of any time this has happened. I have, however, imagined settings this way. For example, if it's a small town with a lot of cranky, exclusive people, I picture a small town we once lived in that was like that, including the layout of the town, how the school looked, etc. I guess I ground myself in something familiar with the setting and then let my imagination go with the characters.

Although, I admit to sometimes casting actors as characters and then the movie casters pick someone very different. Then I have to change my mindset, and this is what I mean about having a preconceived image going into a book. I just like to create my own image and I like my readers to create their own for my characters, as well. This is why I don't have full-face pictures of my main characters on my books.

It sounds like you watch a movie in your head while reading, too? I know a lot of people do this. Do you cast people you know into the characters' roles?


----------



## Steverino (Jan 5, 2011)

I like to see the movie first, actually, because the book is always a richer experience. Seeing the movie second is anticlimactic.

Usually, this depth makes the book better. But not always. Two rare cases where the movie was vastly superior: _The Shawshank Redemption_ (Stephen King) and _Jaws_ (Peter Benchley).


----------



## brianrowe (Mar 10, 2011)

Yeah, I actually find myself reading a book after the movie more often than reading it before. I read The Help after seeing the movie. After finishing season 1 of Game of Thrones, I read the first book. I don't think it's a big issue - I'm able to still use my imagination while reading the book after and not think about the actors and scenes from the movie. I did just read Warm Bodies and now look forward to the movie, which comes out in August 2012.


----------



## hamerfan (Apr 24, 2011)

At least once that I can remember. A Beautiful Mind. 
But mostly I read the book first.


----------



## lpking (Feb 12, 2011)

purplepen79 said:


> If you want a weird experience (at least it was weird for me), be sure to read _A Clockwork Orange _ before you see Stanley Kubrick's version of the same. I read the book before I saw the movie, and it messed with my head because what I pictured when I read the book was so radically different from Kubrick's vision. I don't think it would have been at all the same if I had seen the movie first because then I would have been picturing it while I read the book.
> 
> I love the movie version of _A Room with A View_. I saw it before I tried to read the book, and I've never been able to get into the book because I loved the movie so much.


With regard to Kubrick and _A Clockwork Orange_, every time I watch that movie (seen it several times) his vision of it amazes me. My interpretations were also "radically different."

Give _A Room with a View_ another shot. ;-) (Have you read _Howard's End_? Maybe try it first, to get you in the right frame of mind.)

Books which, for me, stand out as memorable reads after seeing the movie:

Two of the Jack Ryan series -- ..._Red October _and _Patriot Games_
_The English Patient_
_The Da Vinci Code_ (got sucked into both move and book despite myself!)

My imagination is very visual, but I still love seeing how a filmmaker interpreted a text and contrasting it with how I imagined it. Also, a movie can highlight different aspects of a tale, paint characters differently, even come up with some themes you missed when you read the book. It's fascinating to see how others' experiences and outlook colour their interpretations.

[Btw Todd Trumpet, your experience with _Sense and Sensibility_ has some parallels with mine. And I believe Emma Thompson's work there was brilliant, too.

<off topic> I'm not a big fan of Tom Cruise, but I thought _Majority Report_ was a great reinterpretation of a classic. Philip K. Dick had some amazing story ideas. Is there a Philip K. Dick thread here? If not, it would be nice to have one.]


----------



## Guest (Dec 5, 2011)

Sometimes. Not often though.


----------



## normcowie (Jun 21, 2011)

Never. I just can't do this.

Sometimes I wonder about Star Trek books, but I. Just. Can't.


----------



## SidneyW (Aug 6, 2010)

I try to and prefer to read the book first if at all possible, but I have read the book after the film on many occasions. If it looks like I'm never going to get around to a book I'll often go ahead and watch the film if I'm interested. 

It is always interesting to see which changes have been made.


----------



## Chris Strange (Apr 4, 2011)

I usually either read the book first or not at all, but my most recent exception to this was when I saw Scott Pilgrim vs. The World. I immediately ordered all 6 graphic novels and tore through them. I loved the movie, and the movie is rubbish compared to the awesome glory of the graphic novels.


----------



## teashopgirl (Dec 8, 2011)

I usually prefer to read the book first, but last summer I watched The Help before I read the book. I ended up enjoying both experiences. I think part of the reason was that the film was so well done. When I finally read the book, I loved it. Seeing the movie first didn't change that, even though I worried it might.


----------



## gaidinsgirl (Feb 1, 2011)

Yes and it is the only way I end up enjoying both. If I watch the movie after I read the book, I hate the movie. If I read the book second I can still enjoy both. I love Water for Elephants, the book and the movie. Divine Secrets of the Yaya Sisterhood and Fried Green Tomatoes are two others that I read after I watched the movie and enjoyed both versions.


----------



## bjscript (Oct 26, 2011)

I purchased Lovely Bones but never got around to reading it.  Then I saw the movie and it killed any interest I had in the book.  Hated the movie.>>>>>

The movie is a different version of the book. The movie takes chunks of the book but also throws in visual images that are the opposite of what the book conveys (the after life in the movie is Disney on sterioids), which is not the point the book makes.

The movie is always switching tracks between the director's vision and the book, so it feels haphazard and stuck together.

Having so many important characters in the book made it tough to translate into a film.

Bill


----------



## James Conway (Jul 7, 2011)

Yep. I did it with Hammet's Maltese Falcon and The Thin Man


----------



## Brad Murgen (Oct 17, 2011)

I usually read the book first, if I can. I always enjoy the books better, too many times they have to cut or change things to translate it to the big screen. Film is a different medium that tells a story in a different way. You can force a book into that medium and still have a good film, but something is usually lost in translation, even if you aren't aware of it.



Joseph_Evans said:


> I read The Lord of the Rings before seeing the films, but you know what? As sacrilegious as it sounds I actually enjoyed the films more! This is because they cut out the colossal amount of politics and history of Middle Earth and focused just on the current story. The books were fantastic, but I don't think I needed to know all that information.


Totally agree, for me _The Lord of the Rings_ is the only exception to the book-is-better-than-the-movie rule. I love the books, but the movie really made the characters more personable. It's harder to relate to them in the book. At least for me.


----------



## StephenEngland (Nov 2, 2011)

Joseph_Evans said:


> I read The Lord of the Rings before seeing the films, but you know what? As sacrilegious as it sounds I actually enjoyed the films more! This is because they cut out the colossal amount of politics and history of Middle Earth and focused just on the current story. The books were fantastic, but I don't think I needed to know all that information.


I saw LOTR before I read the books--I thought both were good, and the movies were excellent, but some of Jackson's changes were just unusual. I was really annoyed with the way he initially removed and then changed the final showdown between Gandalf and the Witch-King. To me, that was one of the most powerful moments of the story, and he botched it.


----------



## Mercius (Aug 28, 2010)

Sadly, Back To The Future. I thought there might be more to the story when I was twelve...I was wrong and really disappointed. Pride And Prejudice and Middle March I read after watching the movies, and both were excellent!


----------



## joanhallhovey (Nov 7, 2010)

Generally, I like to read the book, then see the movie.
Both are such different mediums, but I always get more from a book.  Or maybe I just absorb it differently.


----------



## djgross (May 24, 2011)

tinytoy said:


> I had to think about this and the only one I can come up with is Bridget Jones's Diary.


Same here 

I did reread  after seeing the 2007 movie. P.D. James took a break from her excellent Adam Dalgleish mystery series to write a dystopian thriller back in 1992. Both the movie and book are chilling, but the book is arguably a bit less bleak. Loved them both.


----------



## Tony Richards (Jul 6, 2011)

Just finishing up with _Sharky's Machine_ by William Diehl, which counts as reading a book some TWENTY YEARS after watching the movie. But it's mostly good.


----------



## michaelabayomi (Dec 13, 2011)

I almost always go back and read the book... once I find out that the movie was an adaptation. That's how I discovered Michael Critchon. I loved watching Congo, Sphere, Jurassic Park and others, but I have to say that the books were WAY better than the movies. And I thought the movies were great to begin with.


----------



## michaelabayomi (Dec 13, 2011)

Joseph_Evans said:


> I read The Lord of the Rings before seeing the films, but you know what? As sacrilegious as it sounds I actually enjoyed the films more! This is because they cut out the colossal amount of politics and history of Middle Earth and focused just on the current story. The books were fantastic, but I don't think I needed to know all that information.


I only just recently finished reading the Lord of the Rings trilogy. I absolutely loved the movies. In fact, The Return of the King is presently my all-time favorite movie. That said, I still think the books were an overall richer experience. Some of the more memorable, and somewhat comical, moments never made it into the movies, like the chapter, The Voice of Saruman. I don't think I'd ever laughed as hard as I did when I read that bit.


----------



## Russell Brooks (Dec 23, 2010)

I prefer reading the book before the movie comes out. Usually in movies, a lot of stuff gets cut out or rewritten, thus not being totally representative of the author's work, or intended story.


----------



## Gone 9/21/18 (Dec 11, 2008)

If I see a movie, I avoid the book. If I read the book, I avoid the movie. One notable exception was The Hunt for Red October. I don't remember why I let myself be talked into the movie after having read and loved the book, but I did and also loved the movie.

P.S. My avoidance method started very young after seeing the movie My Friend Flicka when I'd already read and loved the book and had a mental image of the young hero.


----------



## soofy (Nov 26, 2011)

Many times, most notably

Fight Club (I love the film so much that the book could in no way satisfy me the same way)
No Country For Old Men (Slightly different plot line. The image of Bardem's Anton Chigurh was too powerful in my mind to imagine anything else, to his credit)

But nowadays I make a concerted effort  to not view a film as just a reenactment of the book, rather it is its own separate work and shouldn't be weighed against the original article even though that is very hard to do.


----------



## jaimee83 (Sep 2, 2009)

Over the years I've gotten the book name some movies were based on and bought the book. Now with the internet I can easier find the name of the book.  So,  often I see the movie and then read the book and I can also see new movies coming out and read the book before seeing the movie.  I seem to enjoy the books much better than the films.


----------



## flipside (Dec 7, 2011)

Yep.

Saw The Last Unicorn first before picking up Peter S. Beagle's book. (The novel was much deeper and had more meta in it.)

Same goes for Starship Troopers, although the movie and the book are two entirely different things.

The Princess Bride! Enjoyed both mediums for different reasons.

More often though, I try to read the book first before watching the movie, when applicable.


----------



## Ernie Lindsey (Jul 6, 2010)

I made it about halfway through the Game of Thrones series on HBO this spring before I couldn't stand it any longer and had to start reading the series.  They did a fairly decent job but GoT is so in depth that you need the back story in the books to have 1/3rd of the show make sense.  I just finished up ADWD and can't wait to see how HBO pulls off some of the stuff from the books over the next few seasons/years.  It's going to be one looooong ride.


----------



## busy91 (Feb 27, 2009)

Yes several over the years, let me think...

Carrie
Harry Poter 1,2,3
Lord of the Rings Trilogy
Gone With the Wind

There have been others.  I usually do it the other way around if I can. But sometimes if I watch a movie and thought it was good, then I know the book will be even better.


----------



## DH_Sayer (Dec 20, 2011)

I think I prefer it that way, reading it after watching the movie. When I do, the movie rarely ruins the book, but plenty of movies have been ruined by reading the book first. I remember reading Alex Garland's The Beach and being pretty excited by the upcoming movie. That was a letdown, to say the least. Same with Billie Letts's Where The Heart Is. On the other hand, I thoroughly enjoyed High Fidelity, which I read after seeing the movie.


----------



## Beatriz (Feb 22, 2011)

isaacsweeney said:


> I've done this a few times:
> 
> Silence of the Lambs
> The Shining
> ...


A few times yes and a few times no. Sometimes Hollywood does a pretty good job with the movie. "The Turning Point and Julia" are two books that come to mind.


----------



## JBarry22 (Dec 12, 2011)

Jurassic Park. They were both great.


----------



## Elizabeth Black (Apr 8, 2011)

I read "Casting The Runes" by M. R. James after seeing "Curse Of The Demon". I also read the entire Hannibal Lecter series after seeing "The Silence Of The Lambs". Then there was the entire Lincoln Rhyme series after seeing "The Bone Collector".


----------



## alocsin (Dec 17, 2011)

Yes, most notably, "Hunt for Red October." I liked the book much better than the movie, and it turned me on to Tom Clancy. Have read a few of his novels since.


----------



## Elizabeth Black (Apr 8, 2011)

Joseph_Evans said:


> I read The Lord of the Rings before seeing the films, but you know what? As sacrilegious as it sounds I actually enjoyed the films more! This is because they cut out the colossal amount of politics and history of Middle Earth and focused just on the current story. The books were fantastic, but I don't think I needed to know all that information.


My husband begged me to read LOTR after the movie came out. I tried to read The Hobbit a few years before and threw the book across the room in frustration. I didn't fare much better with LOTR but I did like the movies. I think it was all the extraneous politics and history that turned me off. The main reason I saw LOTR movies in the first place was because I was already a fan of the director. One of my favorite movies is Braindead, which he directed. There are plenty of other movies I saw and later enjoyed the books. LOTR sadly wasn't one of them.


----------



## sesmith (Dec 21, 2011)

I read _Jurassic Park_ after seeing it, but I was also 6 when the movie came out . I'm just now reading the _Harry Potter_ series, and I still haven't read LOTR (although I have read _The Silmarillion_ and thought it was incredible). On the other hand, I saw _Sphere_ after reading the book and was like "wtf..."


----------



## Melissa71 (Dec 21, 2011)

I just finished, I Am Legend.  I couldn't believe how different it was from the movie.  The title and the main character's name were about the only things they had in common.


----------



## JBarry22 (Dec 12, 2011)

sesmith said:


> I read _Jurassic Park_ after seeing it, but I was also 6 when the movie came out .


Sounds like we have a similar story... though I was 10.


----------



## Elizabeth Black (Apr 8, 2011)

JBarry22 said:


> Sounds like we have a similar story... though I was 10.


My son was about 7 when _Jurassic Park_ came out and he wanted me to read the book to him. Both of us enjoyed it.


----------



## SandraMiller (May 10, 2011)

You know, I have similar feelings about LOTR--taken on the whole, I think I enjoy the movies more--I always get sucked into them whenever they are on, and I love watching them.

But some of the changes really bother me...like removing the saving of the shire.  Um, what??  The story never gets to go full circle without that at the end...


----------



## Nicholas Andrews (Sep 8, 2011)

I've gotten into some great books and series through watching the movie first. I got into Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings from seeing the movies first. But the worst thing about the LOTR movies in my opinion was the trend it started in Hollywood. They proved that super-long movies could be major money, so directors and editors everywhere suddenly took their 90 minute stories and released final cuts that were two and a half hours long. The 2003 Incredible Hulk movie is one of the worst offenders that springs to mind.


----------



## ChrisHewitt (Dec 24, 2011)

Not a film but I have read the Sherlock Holmes stories by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle after watching the same stories in a television series starring Jeremy Brett. The TV series followed the original stories very accurately.
I found both the books and TV shows very enjoyable.  
I have also just downloaded the complete collection of Sherlock Holmes stories on the Kindle.  In all this consists of 4 full length novels, 54 short stories and a bonus 12 short horror stories by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.  All this for 86p (equivalent to about $1.50 in US)


----------



## mom133d (aka Liz) (Nov 25, 2008)

The majority of the time I read the book first. Especially when there is alot of hype about it being turned into a movie. I'll seek out the book for movies that I really enjoyed - plot, character or both. The few that come to mind have already been mentioned: Gone with the Wind and The Princess Bride. Although, I don't think I knew there was a Princess Bride book when I found it. Handmaid's Tale. Absolutely love that story. I read Planet of the Apes years after seeing the movie(s). I had no idea that was based on a book. With all of those, I prefered the book over the movie, but some are very close.

Now we turn to the Star Wars novels. Episode 4, I did not like at all. Love the movie. Episode 3 - I really don't like any of the prequels, they all lacked the magic of the original. That said, I was looking for a book at the library and stumbled across the novelization for Phantom Menance. The book is sooooooo much better. The novel showed the internal struggle that Anakin had. I understood why he turned to the dark side. The movie made him just angsty and then he woke up one day and decided he was evil.


----------



## mikep96 (Dec 29, 2011)

sesmith said:


> On the other hand, I saw _Sphere_ after reading the book and was like "wtf..."


LOL, that was my exact reaction to the movie version of Sphere 

I think I saw the first three or four Harry Potter movies before I read the series and I saw the movie version of The Lovely Bones before I read it. And I still haven't read I Am Legend.


----------



## Bruce Blake (Feb 15, 2011)

There have been a few times I've seen the movie first, then read the book -- Carrie, Starship Troopers, and a few others come to mind -- and many other times I've seen the movie then added the book to my mental "to read" list. I'm rarely disappointed with the book, but it's amazing how many times I read the book first and end up disappointed with the movie (though Lord of the Rings and Silence of the Lambs would be exceptions).


----------



## mom133d (aka Liz) (Nov 25, 2008)

Almost forgot: 2001  The movie made so much more sense after reading the novel. I still fall asleep watching it though.


----------



## docnoir (Jan 21, 2011)

Interesting responses. I'm one of those who won't read it after the movie. Not with someone else's vision too clear in my mind, no. Also, I'm at the point where I tend to avoid movies based on books I've read. I've so rarely been satisfied with any of them that I just don't bother anymore. Except for Harry Potter, where the books and films felt like very different experiences. I'm still miffed that Voldemort didn't win in the movie, though. I wanted to be surprised.


----------



## cheriereich (Feb 12, 2011)

Yes, I have before, such as Lord of the Rings and the novelization of Batman: The Beginning. I do try to read the book beforehand when I can.


----------



## mooshie78 (Jul 15, 2010)

SandraMiller said:


> You know, I have similar feelings about LOTR--taken on the whole, I think I enjoy the movies more--I always get sucked into them whenever they are on, and I love watching them.


I probably like the movies and books equally. I saw the first movie and then read all the books (including the Hobbit and Silmarillion). Have seen the movies and read the books several times since then. Both have their own charm and appeal.



> But some of the changes really bother me...like removing the saving of the shire. Um, what?? The story never gets to go full circle without that at the end...


That doesn't bother me too much. The extended version of ROTK already runs around 4 hours, so it's understandable that there just wasn't time for it. I thought the growth of the Hobbits was apparent in the movies without having that scene to drive it home.

I mean I'd have loved to have seen it, but I understand that there just wasn't anyway to squeeze it in even in the extended cut, much less the theatrical cut.


----------



## Melissa71 (Dec 21, 2011)

mikep96 said:


> LOL, that was my exact reaction to the movie version of Sphere
> 
> I think I saw the first three or four Harry Potter movies before I read the series and I saw the movie version of The Lovely Bones before I read it. And I still haven't read I Am Legend.


I enjoyed I am Legend, maybe even more so than the movie. They were so different, there was really no comparison. Parts of the movie annoyed the heck out of me.


----------



## ElisabethGFoley (Nov 20, 2011)

There's actually quite a few that I saw before I was aware of the book version or old enough to read it. _Gone With the Wind_, naturally. _Shane _ and _Old Yeller _ (both were adapted excellently). _A Night To Remember _ by Walter Lord (nonfiction, actually) was very good too. On the other hand, I did not like the books _The Wizard of Oz _ or _Mary Poppins_. The films were sweet; the books just seemed very strange.

Some where I liked the film and then loved the book: _Rebecca_, _To Kill A Mockingbird_, and _Green For Danger_. The last one is probably the only murder-mystery I've seen that didn't suffer by adaptation, even though they did trim out a suspect and _lots _ of red herrings and details.


----------



## ElisabethGFoley (Nov 20, 2011)

Oh, I just remembered another one - _I Remember Mama_. Saw the movie, then read the play and the book (_Mama's Bank Account_). I can't remember whether I read the play & then the book or vice versa, but I loved all three.


----------



## Todd Young (May 2, 2011)

I don't think I've ever read the book after seeing the movie, though I would like to read An Angel at my Table by Janet Frame, and I have seen that movie.


----------



## Rook (Sep 6, 2011)

I usually prefer to read the book first so that I have a chance to form my own visuals before they are handed to me, but one exception was Jurassic Park. Way back in the day, those cgi dinosaurs were like nothing before them, so it was fun to have the images from the movie dancing in my head when I finally settled in to read the novel.


----------



## CharlieLange (Nov 22, 2010)

Yes. I watched Starship Troopers a few years before reading the book. I actually liked the movie, but the book was just that much better when I jumped into it.


----------



## dggass (Apr 3, 2011)

Yes a few times, Nicholas Sparks "The Notebook", "A Night in Rondanthe" and "Message in a Bottle".  Most recently I purchased "The Help" and "Water for Elephants" to read.


----------



## xenous (Jan 2, 2012)

uf coars!

Many times: The Shawshank redemption, Candide, Twilight and I've read Harry Potter prior to the movie, I've also just finished the hunger games and now im expecting the movie. And...I've made a heroic yet failed attempt to read Twilight before the movie...but it was too hard even for me! 
Also:
I read the langoliers after seeing the movie. But can't say the same about Christine, Carie, It or the shining if there are any movies based on them?


----------



## docnoir (Jan 21, 2011)

I think the best ones to see would be adaptations of those authors who have a very distinct writing style that's hard to film--like James Ellroy's L.A. CONFIDENTIAL. The book is a very different experience from the film.


----------



## Alan Petersen (May 20, 2011)

I'm doing that right now.

Last week I watched the movie, "Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy" which was excellent BTW! Gary Oldman was amazing in it. I also remember watching the BBC TV mini-series with Alec Guinness when I was a kid. But I never read the classic book until now. I haven't finished reading it yet so if it's different ending from the movie, don't spoil it for me.


----------



## jumbojohnny (Dec 25, 2011)

This has only ever happened once, a long time ago. Even though I was just a kid, I read Day of the Jackal and was totally gobsmacked by how brilliant it was, then I saw the film, which, I am glad to say lived and still lives up to the book - I can watch plummy old Foxy being cold and calculated again and again. But I didn't keep up with Freddie Forsyth for some reason and the Odessa File was out on film, went to see that, then read the book, which was also a staggering read. Not happened since though; not a deliberate policy, just ain't happened since.


----------



## Kimberly Llewellyn (Aug 18, 2011)

I just had this happen...or rather...not happen.

I have a huge to-be-read stack. On the top was _The Help_. Over the holidays, my extended family (all women) watched the movie. We loved it. Afterward, the other women were excited to read the book, but I felt like the excitement was deflated so I don't know if I am going to read it (bummer!). Maybe because I know how the ending is going to turn out? Or maybe because my reading pile is so big and I need to move on?

I do feel as though the book often seems to be better than the movie. But not always. For example, I loved _Water for Elephants _ in both book and movie form equally and the ending in _The Firm _ in the movie seemed a teeny bit better.


----------

