Popular books and their movie adaptations always beg the question: is the book always better than the movie?

Many believe that books are always superior to their film counterparts, however, some disagree, claiming that movies provide more detail and storytelling than the books they were based on. 

I believe that it depends on the book/movie pair, but in my experience I have sometimes felt as if the book and its movie bring out such different emotions that they can’t even be compared against each other.

For example, Harry Potter is known as one of the most popular book to film adaptations in history. I have read the first five Harry Potter books, and also watched every movie. I can say confidently that both are fantastic works of art and it’s very hard to compare film and literature as if they were the same.

Books provide a different perspective compared to film. Instead of seeing literal images and scenes of the plot, you are forced to use your imagination, which in many ways can lead to a more entertaining experience.

With film, you are limited to only seeing what the directors have decided to show in the movie. But, unlike books, you can experience new levels of emotion through imagery, sound, and creative special effects. 

A few examples of books that are said to be better than their movies are Percy Jackson, The Hobbit and The Shining. Some movies that are said to be better than their books are The Godfather, Forrest Gump and Jaws. 

I think the debate of books versus movies is very subjective. Some may love to use their imagination to create their own story based on the author’s narrative. However, others prefer to see the words come to life on screen with added intensity from vibrant colors and emotion evoking music.