9/19/12
This is a thing. Please join me in celebration.
It looks like Jackson's tried very hard to stick so close. I mean, c'mon, that was Beorn! It had to have been! And how they got the details of Gollum looking not as decrepit as in Lord of the Rings.
We have to go to a showing. Like, for a graduation gift. (Graduation is the week after this comes out.)
Showing posts with label books vs. movies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label books vs. movies. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Friday, November 18, 2011
Three Trailers that Intrigue Me
11-18-11
I mean, yes, trailers are supposed to intrigue you, but these three are ones that really do.
First, the trailer for The Hunger Games. (If you haven't read the first book, The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins, please do so and then go watch the trailer.)
This is the description from Collins' website: Katniss is a 16-year-old girl living with her mother and younger sister in the poorest district of Panem, the remains of what used be the United States. Long ago the districts waged war on the Capitol and were defeated. As part of the surrender terms, each district agreed to send one boy and one girl to appear in an annual televised event called, "The Hunger Games." The terrain, rules, and level of audience participation may change but one thing is constant: kill or be killed. When her sister is chosen by lottery, Katniss steps up to go in her place.
I think the trailer does a pretty good job of demonstrating this one concept. Yeah, they add in some of the other characters, but that's the difference between movies and books, I think.
Second, the trailer for Mirror Mirror. It's a Snow White re-imagining or something akin (so I gather from the trailer), and it's intrigued me, enough so that I want to go see it at some point. [Then I read somewhere that there's a second Snow White movie (trailer here) called Snow White and the Huntsman. Looks a little creepier than I would like. But maybe I'll see it as well.]
Third, the trailer for Pixar's Brave. I love Pixar movies, and they're doing Scottish people. It looks a little like a departure from their norm, but hey, it's Pixar, they will do what they do, and as long as it's a good story, I'm probably going to like it.
Anyway, whatever strikes your fancy. Also, as a postscript, please go look up the two Sherlock Holmes trailers for next month. Oh, yes, there are two, and oh, yes, I want to see that movie.
More later.
I mean, yes, trailers are supposed to intrigue you, but these three are ones that really do.
First, the trailer for The Hunger Games. (If you haven't read the first book, The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins, please do so and then go watch the trailer.)
This is the description from Collins' website: Katniss is a 16-year-old girl living with her mother and younger sister in the poorest district of Panem, the remains of what used be the United States. Long ago the districts waged war on the Capitol and were defeated. As part of the surrender terms, each district agreed to send one boy and one girl to appear in an annual televised event called, "The Hunger Games." The terrain, rules, and level of audience participation may change but one thing is constant: kill or be killed. When her sister is chosen by lottery, Katniss steps up to go in her place.
I think the trailer does a pretty good job of demonstrating this one concept. Yeah, they add in some of the other characters, but that's the difference between movies and books, I think.
Second, the trailer for Mirror Mirror. It's a Snow White re-imagining or something akin (so I gather from the trailer), and it's intrigued me, enough so that I want to go see it at some point. [Then I read somewhere that there's a second Snow White movie (trailer here) called Snow White and the Huntsman. Looks a little creepier than I would like. But maybe I'll see it as well.]
Third, the trailer for Pixar's Brave. I love Pixar movies, and they're doing Scottish people. It looks a little like a departure from their norm, but hey, it's Pixar, they will do what they do, and as long as it's a good story, I'm probably going to like it.
Anyway, whatever strikes your fancy. Also, as a postscript, please go look up the two Sherlock Holmes trailers for next month. Oh, yes, there are two, and oh, yes, I want to see that movie.
More later.
Friday, April 2, 2010
Imagination
4-2-10
I like books. I like movies. However, I prefer to read the book before I watch the movie, if the book existed before the movie. Why?
So I can imagine what the characters look like and how the action plays out for myself, thank you. Having the images just passively flash at a person will just weaken that person's imagination. Maybe in the smallest increment, but the pictures we see forever imprint on our minds. Even though I read Lord of the Rings before the movies even came out, I see the movie versions in my head now, when I read. Same goes for the Harry Potter franchise--I forever see Daniel Radcliffe as Harry, no matter what my original imagination of Harry was.
It's not necessarily a bad thing; it's definitely my preference--and if the books came after the movie, it's usually good to have the movie as a visual reference anyway. For example, in any novelization of any of the Star Wars movies. Those books automatically assume that the reader already knows what the main characters look like (Leia, Han, Luke, Anakin, those characters) and spend more time describing the newer characters that do not exist in the movies. Maybe that's bad writing, but that's what I've noticed.
And, sometimes, the movie can be better than the book. I'm sure you can think of some examples.
What do you think? Books before movies? Movies before books? Some combination of the two?
~Ashlee
I like books. I like movies. However, I prefer to read the book before I watch the movie, if the book existed before the movie. Why?
So I can imagine what the characters look like and how the action plays out for myself, thank you. Having the images just passively flash at a person will just weaken that person's imagination. Maybe in the smallest increment, but the pictures we see forever imprint on our minds. Even though I read Lord of the Rings before the movies even came out, I see the movie versions in my head now, when I read. Same goes for the Harry Potter franchise--I forever see Daniel Radcliffe as Harry, no matter what my original imagination of Harry was.
It's not necessarily a bad thing; it's definitely my preference--and if the books came after the movie, it's usually good to have the movie as a visual reference anyway. For example, in any novelization of any of the Star Wars movies. Those books automatically assume that the reader already knows what the main characters look like (Leia, Han, Luke, Anakin, those characters) and spend more time describing the newer characters that do not exist in the movies. Maybe that's bad writing, but that's what I've noticed.
And, sometimes, the movie can be better than the book. I'm sure you can think of some examples.
What do you think? Books before movies? Movies before books? Some combination of the two?
~Ashlee
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)