Originally Posted by medford
So let me get this straight, you haven't read a book for entertainment purposes in the last 20 years, yet you're convinced the movie version of a book is every bit as good at the book itself.
How the hell would you know either way????
I'm convinced that the trade off for a few missed details here or there is well worth the trade off in hours saved of my free time to do other things.
Assuming the story remains true to the book, unlike a World War Z which basically just borrowed the name of the book and also had people and a zombie epidemic going on, there simply can't be enough extra going on in the book to make a difference to me. If it were that important to the story, it would have been in the movie or tv show.
An example here that was given was about Game of Thrones, which admittedly I don't watch and doubt I ever will, that in the book it is described about how the sword felt in the users hand. That is great and all, but to me it doesn't really add to the story. For some it may. For me, it seems like wasted space. I care more about what is going to be done with the sword than how it feels. It was also noted how it glimmered. I can see that on a tv show or in a movie if it is deemed needed to be added.
There may have really been a place for a description in sci-fi types of books 20-30+ years ago because they simply couldn't replicate on film what they wanted to describe and have it show up in a way that the viewer could have a true vision of what they were describing. Those days are gone though. The special effects are up to par now to have things translate to my eyes to match what is being described from a visual standpoint.