Romeo and Juliet is a terrible example and can't be used. The debate is BOOKS into movies. Not plays. Plays by definition are designed to be seen not read. There is no true way of gaining the feeling intended by the playwright by reading a play. Performance is key. This is particularly true with works by Beckett as visual elements are essential.
Lord of the Rings Green Mile The Dark Knight Trilogy (does this count?) The Hunger Games Series Soon-to-be-movie The Martian (coming in 2015)
Maze runner movie is **** trilogy way better, eragon was completely screwed over in the movie fml(my fav books), hobbit book is slow but more in depth(movie ok but no so good) Harry potter books really good movies not better than book tho but really ****** the ending in deathly hallows
Every single harry potter movie. The books bored me after 20 pages, where I absolutely loved the movies. Sorry if this one has been mentioned before :lol:
books are almost always better. prime examples are The Maze Runner series and The Hunger Games series. Harry Potter movies are really good though but the books are still better
If you can't keep into a book, you have no business on this thread really. You wouldn't know anything about this topic. :|
I mean, I'm not trying to be rude or anything. It's just that you can't give an accurate answer :lol: just a hint, the hunger games was boring at the beginning. You have to get past the first 5-6 chapters before anything entertaining happens.
the outsiders. when i was in middle school we were doing some assignment on the book. i absolutely didn't understand it as i am now a very strong auditory learner. but when i watched the movie, i knew who everyone was, who played what role and what the entire story was about. :mrgreen: