So the Game of Thrones Season 6 Teaser was released two days ago. While it exhibited a serious twist in the storyline, putting more conundrum at the upcoming episodes, it got me thinking. Are books better than the series? or visual adaptation is better than textual adaptation? Both have their merits and demerits. Books are good for people with good imagination and focused nature while tv is good for lazybums who want it convenient and can wait for it. But there must be some borderline in it, right?
So Today I’m going acknowledge both sides(being the only lawyer present,not actual lawyer though) and will become all judge jury and the executioner.(It’s just a catchy phase i thought i would include. I don’t even fully understand what it means) . So let us begin. Valar morghulis.(reason same as last bracket.)
1.Game of Thrones : This is one series that is liked by many people. There are many reasons due to which tv is better than books. One You wouldn’t want to know the next character to be killed. Two you may not like the series after reading books but you will still want to read books after watching tv. Three if you don’t like the tv series you will save some serious time ’cause you will save some 14000 pages of reading(approximately).
2.Dexter: The ongoing success of Dexter is a fine example of switched-on producers cherry-picking the best part of a novel — the idea of a serial killer with a social conscience of sorts — and running with it, at the expense of extraneous plot lines/characters/general fidelity to the book.
This is something that HBO has been good at in recent years .
3.Sex and the City: Well for obvious reasons.
4.Gossip Girl: Well i don’t know much about it but internet says so(God’ honest truth. See what kind of a man I am?)
5. And for movies, Up in the Air: A mildly received book but a great movie.
And in this corner we have,
Those books that are considered better than tv
- Dan Brown’ Angels and Demons (or for that sake pick any of his books) : It is always better than the movies on which it is imposed. Always. Without fail.
2. ‘Gulliver’s Travels’ by Jonathan Swift: In case you’ve wisely blocked out any knowledge you might’ve had about this film being made, here’s a run-down: Jack Black, for some reason, was cast as Gulliver, a dopey mailroom dude who has a crush on a coworker whose worldliness he envies. He’s sent to “find the secret to the Bermuda Triangle,” and the resulting mess would more accurately be described as a sequel to “Honey I Blew Up theKid”.
3. ‘Hellblazer’: Unless your idea of a good time is listening to Keanu Reeves stating the obvious for two hours (he literally says, in his most dramatic, scraggly voice, “Cats are good”), then you’re probably better off reading the comic book series that Constantine was based on.
4. ‘The Cat in the Hat’ by Dr. Seuss: Not only does the flick nix a lot of Dr. Seuss’s clever rhymes, replacing them with modern-day equivalents (“no video games!”), it also featured Mike Myers coughing up a hairball.
So What’s your pick? Would you go with a. book where you get to imagine everything but takes your time or the tv adaptation where you don’t have to do anything but provides visual confrontation?
Comment your Answer.