Book or movie first?

[Desert Strawberry]

My 10 yr old just started reading Wind in the Willows. The movie is available on Netflix. Should we watch it now, or wait until he's finished?

 

I prefer to watch the movie first, because it's never going to measure up to the book, and it's always disappointing if you read first.

 

What says the Hive on this Very Important and Highly Contested Topic?

[ThisIsTheDay]

Toadally read the book first.  (Sorry, Wind in the Willows humor there.)

 

It's always been my rule to read the book before the movie. Ninety percent of the time, the movie doesn't live up to the book, so my kids have learned to appreciate the books.

 

(And I have to add that Wind in the Willows was one of least favorite hs books ever.)

[Mom2TheTeam]

Book before movie always in our house. 

 

I actually like that the movie doesn't live up to the books.  It reaffirms how wonderful books are and how much better it is to read than watch.  :D

 

I read someone here say something like, you can never unwatch a movie.  Once you have that image in your mind of what a character looks like, according to the movie, you can never get rid of it.  Part of the magic is lost for the book because you can't use your own imagination to "create" the character or setting in your mind.  It is always going to be what the movie makers envisioned. 

 

I wish I could unwatch several movies.  I was disappointed by some books because I had the vision of the movie, which I'd seen first, so clear in my mind.  Charlie and the Chocolate factory is one.  I didn't like the book very much because I'd seen the movie so many times (the Gene Wilder version).  My son really didn't like the movie and regrets watching it.  It was so different and seeing Charlie steal the Fizzy Lifting Drink, which was out of character of the book Charlie, was very upsetting to him.  "Charlie would never do that!" he said.  There were other portions he didn't like as well.  Other movies, I saw the movie after reading the book and now I can't get back my original image of the book.  I'm sad about it.  :(

 

We are going to be very selective about which classic book movies we will let our children see.  For us, definitely always book first.

[Desert Strawberry]

He asked to see the movie first. We'll see what he thinks after finishing both. 

[Farrar]

I don't like this book or movie so I can't really opine on it as a specific set.  I would say neither.

 

But as a general question, I think it depends greatly on the kid.  I used to always think book first, hands down.  The book is better nine times out of ten.  Having read the book gives you the ability to critically evaluate the movie from that perspective.  And not having seen the movie means the movie's choice of cast, tone, setting, etc. don't prejudice you into not having your own idea of what the characters look like, etc.  Plus, for fun, exciting movies, seeing it can be a small carrot for finishing the book.

 

But when I was teaching, I worked with a lot of kids who you'd call reluctant readers.  I think for some kids, seeing the movie first is good.  They may need to have that picture of the action because they struggle to conceptualize more complex stories.  Or they have trouble with reading comprehension and seeing the movie, and thus having an idea of what to expect as the story goes on, helps them read and understand the book better.  It's previewing the story for them.  Or it just gets them excited enough to get moving on the book at all.

[Alte Veste Academy]

My kids are starting to like the idea of book first, movie never. They have been so very disappointed in most movies based on books. I still vote book, then movie though.

 

On the bright side, life should be better for our grandkids, because DS10 proclaimed after the last subpar viewing, "When I grow up, I am going to make movies just like books!"

[tammyw]

I usually do book first, then movie. This worked well with dd10, but ds7 has seen lots of the movies but not read all those books.

 

I do like saving a movie until after we've watched the book. Somehow it just seems more special then!

[MtnMama]

Definitely book, then movie.

[Kuovonne]

I go by whichever was the original creation. If the book was written first, read the book first. If the movie was made first, watch the movie first. I believe that, in general, the product of the original creative genius is better than someone else's interpretation.

[Guest boonefhh]

It reaffirms how wonderful books are and how much better it is to read than watch.

[Erica in OR]

For me personally I've decided it's better for me to see the movie first and then read the book. Otherwise too much of my watching time is spent yelling at the screen "That's not like the book!" or mumbling some remark under my breath about how the book was so much more detailed or different, etc. (e.g. The Help, Moneyball) I have a hard time just enjoying the movie. If I see the movie first and enjoy it for what it is as a movie, reading the book afterward can give me a much richer experience. I do agree with a previous poster about then having an image in my mind already as I read. After watching several episodes of Longmire on TV, I read the first book that the series is based on. I could picture the actor that plays the sheriff as the book progressed. It didn't bother me much, as he was very well cast, but I wasn't creating my own picture either.

 

Erica in OR

[marbel]

I used to be adamant:  book, then movie.  My kids too were disappointed sometimes, to the point that they refused to see any movie based on a book. I'm not sure if it was The Other Side of the Mountain or Stuart Little that did that to them.  Probably both.  I think we broke the rule with LotR.  Neither of my kids had read all three books when we got the itch to watch the movies.  We went ahead with it.  My son has since read the books; my daughter hasn't but probably never will. (Just not her kind of book.)   I'm glad we went ahead and watched the movies without making her read the books first.  

 

Since then, they've come to see that the book and the movie are different entities.  So now, it doesn't matter which comes first.

 

[boscopup]

I usually do book first, then movies. Though my younger kids are sometimes seeing movies first, since neither of them are ready to read the books we might watch movies for. LOTR is a great example. My oldest and I read through them at the same time (two bookmarks), then watched each movie when we were done. The little kids wanted to watch the movies too. I'm not reading LOTR out loud. :lol: So I let them watch the movies. They've now seen all of the movies, and they're probably at least a few years away from reading the books.

 

It was good for my oldest to read the books first. He and I would discuss the differences in the movie and think about why they might make that change, etc. I think he noticed more differences than I did. :tongue_smilie: (though I watched the movies when they came out, and I didn't read the books until I read them alongside my son)

 

Then there are some movies where reading the book may not matter... Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs. We had read the book, and then we watched the movie. They weren't at all the same story! :lol: I mean, they both involved food coming out of the sky and destroying the town, but that was about it! So in that case, it probably wouldn't have mattered if we'd done movie or book first.

 

I haven't seen or read Wind in the Willows (we tried the audio book version, and none of us could get into it), so I can't comment on that one specifically.

[Mom2TheTeam]

That's a good point about movies you would watch but not read the book version at all for whatever reason.  Personally, LOTR is not something I would read.  I've seen one or two of the movies...it's not my thing in book or movie.  So, that is a good point.  I guess I was really thinking specifically about movies that you will definitely be reading the book version of at some point.  For us that would be books like, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, The Chronicles of Narnia, and Charlotte's Web (which my kids have seen as a movie already and I regret allowing it...but I didn't realize then, now I know).  There are others of course, but those come to mind.

 

So, books we wouldn't read, we would still see the movie and thus, would see it first.  ;)

 

Boscopop - I had no idea Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs was a book!  Although, most movies start as books don't they.  :)

[Kathryn]

Book before movie always in our house.

 

I actually like that the movie doesn't live up to the books. It reaffirms how wonderful books are and how much better it is to read than watch. :D

 

I read someone here say something like, you can never unwatch a movie. Once you have that image in your mind of what a character looks like, according to the movie, you can never get rid of it. Part of the magic is lost for the book because you can't use your own imagination to "create" the character or setting in your mind. It is always going to be what the movie makers envisioned.

 

I wish I could unwatch several movies. I was disappointed by some books because I had the vision of the movie, which I'd seen first, so clear in my mind. Charlie and the Chocolate factory is one. I didn't like the book very much because I'd seen the movie so many times (the Gene Wilder version). My son really didn't like the movie and regrets watching it. It was so different and seeing Charlie steal the Fizzy Lifting Drink, which was out of character of the book Charlie, was very upsetting to him. "Charlie would never do that!" he said. There were other portions he didn't like as well. Other movies, I saw the movie after reading the book and now I can't get back my original image of the book. I'm sad about it. :(

 

We are going to be very selective about which classic book movies we will let our children see. For us, definitely always book first.

This is pretty much my answer for *my* children. I know people are different and some might benefit from the opposite approach.

 

After reading Charlie and the Chocolate Factory a few years ago, DS found it on tv and started watching it. He only made it a few minutes before turning the tv off in disgust. He usually just complains about changes made, but that one he just couldn't stand. He was really upset about Faramir in LOTR too, but that didn't stop him from watching the movies over and over.

[*Michelle*]

Book first, but always with the caveat that the movie should be viewed as a stand-alone and not as a faithful rendering of the book.  Viewed through that lens, I'm usually pleasantly surprised instead of grossly disappointed.

 

My husband, on the other hand, prefers to watch the movie first.  He has trouble visualizing the characters and likes to have those images supplied for him before he starts a book.

[LNC]

I was always book before movie. But, I let my non Austen lover watch Pride and Prejudice. Now, she's reading the annotated edition and savoring every word!

[LNC]

I was always book before movie. But, I let my non Austen lover watch Pride and Prejudice. Now, she's reading the annotated edition and savoring every word!

[happymomofboys]

Book first!

[ThisIsTheDay]

Then there are some movies where reading the book may not matter... Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs. We had read the book, and then we watched the movie. They weren't at all the same story! 

 

 

Jumanji, that's another movie that is nothing like the book!

 

:)