Interview with ReadNUS: Books vs Movie Adaptations—The Age-Old Debate
The battle between books and their film adaptations articulates an age-old debate. On one end, many prefer the personal, intimate experience of flipping a book and engaging with the printed text that stirs our imagination and broadens our horizons. On the other end, many argue that a cinematic experience is more communal and absorbing, having visuals and sounds that make us forget our reality for a good two hours.
As the debate continues on, the ReadNUS Editorial Team answers a series of questions to weigh in on the difference between these hobbies (and which we personally prefer).
What is your favourite book-to-film adaptation?
Yuki: Anne of Green Gables! It’s my favourite childhood (and maybe adult) series of all time. Among all of the reinventions of Montgomery’s writing, my favourite is the 1985 movie series. (I also really like Anne with an E even though it deviates from the source material.)
Daphne: I love the Maze Runner series! It packs the right amount of action, suspense, and character development for me, and those are things I look out for in stories, both in books and movies.
Wan Qin: I really like Call Me By Your Name! The book is great in its portrayal of the interior life of the main character, Elio, through wonderful descriptions of his longing and desire. The film takes it a step further with its cinematography, its script and the wonderful acting of Timothee Chalamet (!!!). It’s a film that I enjoy re-watching from time to time to pretend that I’m spending summers in the Italian countryside (although the Armie Hammer scandal ruined this film for me quite a bit).
Sean: When I was younger, I loved reading Roald Dahl’s books and I remember being so enamoured by the film adaptation of Matilda. It captures the wonder and magic of the book so well and its sense of innocence makes me feel like a child all over again whenever I watch it.
Wendi: Lord of the Rings trilogy hands down!! This fantasy epic by the OG wizard titan Tolkien was a triumph in itself and it could be considered the epic that made the most profound impact on a more modern approach to fantasy that we know and love today, which includes a dynamic and grandiloquent story arc that proudly harks back to a glorious Homeric age. The movie adaptations of this series of books nevertheless did Tolkien’s writings justice and it is probably the only film adaptation that was equally as good or even better than the books themselves in my very honest opinion.
Joyce: The Hunger Games is my favourite, though I’ve only watched the first and second films. Many details from the book, like Katniss’s costume catching on fire and the three finger peace sign felt way more powerful in visual form. Watching a huge crowd from District 12 raising the three finger salute to show solidarity with Katniss creates an emotional impact that is hard to put into words. The action sequences also carried a greater sense of urgency in the film compared to the book as you can actually see the actors get injured and run frantically towards the Cornucopia.
Megan: I don’t really have a favourite adaptation yet as of now, but I do have fond memories of squealing over the 1995 BBC TV series of Pride and Prejudice with my JC friends. Pride and Prejudice was our A-Level set text and the adaptation not only painted a charming portrait of the Regency era, it also breathed much life into the classic love story.
Vianne: I agree with Megan and Wendi! Pride and Prejudice (although my personal favourite is Joe Wright’s 2005 version) and Lord of the Rings are phenomenal and they’re definitely hard to beat as book-to-film adaptations. However, a recent favourite is Greta Gerwig’s Little Women. Gerwig’s film is a fresh and original take on the well-known classic that’s beloved by many – a feat she managed to accomplish despite the fact that there have been no less than five previous film adaptations of Louisa May Alcott’s novel. Her version is no less touching or poignant than the original novel, but still brings something of its own to the table of numerous film adaptations that have brought the story to life on the big screen.
What is your least favourite book-to-film adaptation, if any?
Yuki: I don’t know, The Divergent series? Or maybe the opera/movie Madama Butterfly. I generally steer clear of bad books and films, so I don’t have a big enough sample size. Plus, if it’s a bad book, it’s probably going to be a bad film.
Nat: I don’t really watch a lot of movies, but I do remember being very disappointed when Eragon came out and flopped pretty badly. I was a very big fantasy buff when I was a kid, and I guess the technology at the time wasn’t really right to capture the cool dragons and special effects. Also, Eragon as a book is pretty long and meanders a lot so maybe it was never destined to be a good film after all…
Vianne: Both Kenneth Branagh’s Agatha Christie adaptations (Death on the Nile and Murder on the Orient Express). I’m a huge fan of Christie’s murder mysteries, so I was hugely disappointed by Branagh’s adaptations. Branagh succeeded in butchering both novels in his attempts to adapt them for the big screen and ruined the characters and plots that Christie so expertly created. His films do not do Christie’s novels justice at all – I think I’m better off just reading her books.
In your opinion, what is something about books that movies cannot capture? (or just something you prefer about reading, compared to watching a film)
Yuki: I think I speak of this through the lens of screenwriting, which is that a lot of films need to depend way more on showing rather than telling. Books do also practice the art of “show, not tell,” but there’s some leeway to psychologising the text and revealing the inner workings of the mind and heart (whereas films may have less room to work with). Imagine trying to make a film about The Death of Ivan Ilyich. Or The Stranger. Haha.
Daphne: I think books let our imagination run wilder than movies can, because we can picture a scene by ourselves rather than seeing it fixed in a movie, including how the set looks like, how the characters portray themselves etc. Reading also allows us to immerse ourselves in the story at our own pace, whereas for movies we are kind of pushed along the story, especially if it’s a fast-paced plot, and sometimes they can be way too fast because they need to squeeze the scenes within that one or two hours plus haha!
Wan Qin: I think a lot of the characterisation and world-building can be lacking in the hands of a less skilled movie director. Perhaps it’s because they’re limited by the runtime of the movie which forces directors to spend most of it on the plot instead. Take for instance The Divergent series mentioned by Yuki, the movie fails to sufficiently establish the world which can make for a confusing, alienating and unenjoyable experience for movie-goers who have not read the books!
Sean: To me, reading books is often like letting someone in and listening as they tell you their story. Although great film-makers succeed in aligning us with certain characters (I think Greta Gerwig does this extremely well), I do not experience the intimacy of reading when watching most films.
Shannon: While both books and films can explore various ways of experimenting with their forms, I think aspects of narration are difficult to capture in a film. Film-makers could employ voice-overs, but hearing someone narrate the story to you, more often than not, takes away from the diegetic sequence on screen. Apart from that, some stylistic experimentation may be difficult to mimic — I think this is why the movie version of NW by Zadie Smith falls short of its novel-form; it can’t seem to capture the radical choices by Smith like jumping from a long-form, stream of consciousness prose, to a listicle with elements ranging from text messages to street directions.
Megan: I agree wholeheartedly with Daphne — books leave plenty of room for imagination as opposed to films. Books allow everyone to conjure up their own heroes, their own villains, and their own universes, while films more or less dictate these things. The fact that everyone’s own worldview and perspectives inevitably colour their interpretation of a book is precisely what makes reading such a personal and enjoyable experience.
Conversely, what is something about movies that you prefer?
Yuki: There’s just something about being able to hear and see and better visualise the characters who you love so much! With perfect casting, it’s basically the case that dreams become reality.
Daphne: Sometimes, certain scenes are hard to imagine in our mind so the movies help bring it to life in a way! Especially for action stories, I think movies let us feel the adrenaline of the story better, through putting us in the perspective of the characters.
Wan Qin: I like how some book-to-movie adaptations can encourage viewers to pick up the book after watching the movie! For example, fun rom-coms such as She’s the Man and Ten Things I Hate About You make the idea of reading Shakespeare so much less intimidating. Innovative book-to-movie adaptations are an art in itself as filmmakers put their own spin on things.
Sean: In my opinion, films tend to execute world-building much better than books (sorry that this contradicts your point, Wan Qin). The production design and costume design in films in Blade Runner and Dune took my breath away and allowed me to better appreciate the fictional worlds that the stories were set in. And seeing the clock arena in The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is a moment that I will never forget. Thus, I think that, sometimes, it really is better to show instead of tell.
Shannon: I agree with Yuki and Daphne that it feels like a creation of a world. I really appreciate when film-makers play with visual and aural aspects like camera angles, colours (!!!), and music, making the watching experience one that engages with so many of my senses.
Joyce: I agree with Sean that films tend to portray the setting better, especially those that are on a grand scale. For example, stories that take place in a dystopia, sci-fi or nature setting.
While I enjoyed both the book and film versions of The Revenant, only the film impressed me with the vastness and grandeur of the North American wilderness. The wide panoramic shots of snowy forests established the harshness of Mother Nature and the vulnerability of the characters in a way that the book could not.
Vianne: I agree with Wan Qin that film adaptations help to make the books they’re based on more approachable! At first glance, for example, the Lord of the Rings is a hefty and lengthy book filled with extremely descriptive writing and meticulous detail that could easily scare readers off. Watching the films (though they’re admittedly quite lengthy as well) could help readers make better sense of the text and navigate their way through the novel more easily. So, in some ways, film adaptations can help readers better appreciate certain books.
Overall, which do you personally prefer? (of course, you can also sit on the fence)
Yuki: I’m huge on film and books but I think I prefer books (it came first in my life and its staying power is phenomenal).
Daphne: I’m on the fence for this haha! I think it really depends on the story and different stories have different requirements; sometimes they can get so beautifully portrayed in movie form, and sometimes they are better off just staying in the realm of a book. Personally, I also think that people in general expect more from movie adaptations (that’s why we even have this debate in the first place haha!), so it has to be great screenwriting, set design, acting etc for the story to really come alive through the screen.
Shannon: I think the previous two questions helped me to realise that it’s so difficult to choose!! Because they have their irreplaceable qualities. I guess I’d choose film when I wish to simply enjoy an experience that has been realised for me, but books when I would rather pace the episodes myself.
Nat: I think I enjoy both mediums in different ways! Books are a way to learn something about someone’s perspectives, and to savour how authors try to express their own feelings and messages. I appreciate the cumulative effort of films, as it takes the work of directors, actors, backstage crew and other creative artists to bring a film to life.
If you could adapt any book into a film, which would you choose? (If you want to answer an additional question: how would you subvert the original story?)
Yuki: I had to manually cross-check every single book I’ve read because there’s so many books which have been turned into films. I would choose Keigo Higashino’s Malice or Gabriel Garcia Marquez’s One Hundred Years of Solitude (which, shockingly enough, has not been done in full-scale yet). The former because I love the Detective and the surprising warmth contained in that novel; and the latter because he’s my favourite author and why hasn’t it been done yet?
Shannon: Trying to answer this question helped me to realise that there are film adaptations of so many of my favourite books that I never knew… Maybe Hardboiled & Hard Luck by Banana Yoshimoto?
Joyce: I second Keigo Higashino’s Malice. The story is full of crazy twists and turns and would make an awesome thriller movie. Higashino’s most famous work, The Devotion of Suspect X was made into a movie too, and I really enjoyed it so I’m looking forward to other adaptations of his books. Also, I feel like the crime scenes in detective novels can be hard to visualise at times, so a film would make the audience feel more engaged, as though they are following the detective and solving the crime together with him.
We hope our answers have helped you explore what you prefer about reading a book or watching a film. Hopefully, this encourages you to read the book that has inspired your favourite film, or watch the film adaptation of a book you have read!