I have both a T-shirt and a coffee cup that admonish one to “Never judge a book by its movie”. Generally sound advice, since one or the other will often disappoint depending on which is first experienced. For myself, while I usually enjoy the movie, I generally find it lacking, especially in the case of the filming of a classic book. Not surprising given that Hollywood has anywhere from 90 to 150 minutes to tell the story. Even with exceptions such as the four-hour Gone with the Wind, the book still wasn’t given full justice. It seems as if the BBC does the best job of it-they simply expect the commitment of anywhere from 4 to 8 evenings to cover the story! Every once in a while, it may be your opinion that the movie is actually better than the book; I found one (more on that later).
So, why do both? Can’t we get the gist of the story in 120 minutes? Well, sure. Do you really need to read Ben Hur, War and Peace, David Copperfield, (pick your combination of great movie and doorstop-sized book)? Well, no, not really. Certainly, you can get enough to have a reasonably intelligent conversation about the story, or maybe even enough to pass your English exam.
I began my classic literature reading following my viewing of the Orson Welles-Joan Fontaine production of Jane Eyre. I was captivated by the story. The credits said, “based upon the novel”; The next Saturday I secured my library copy. Somewhat daunted by the size of the book (there was obviously more to this story than the hour and a half I spent watching it), I nevertheless began reading that Saturday afternoon. I finished it at 2:00 am Sunday morning (and had 6 hours of sleep before being yanked out of bed in time for the 9:00 am mass). That book became, and has remained for the past 57 years, my favorite book. I re-read it at least once a year. There was so much more to the story, the characters, the different plot devices at play. The movie just could not cover them all.
Would I have discovered my love of this story if I hadn’t seen the film? Probably, but maybe not for many years. It turned out to be required reading in my college class on the Victorian Novel. It would have been a long time to not find my favorite book.
This experience was followed by discovering Great Expectations, The Hound of the Baskervilles, Ben Hur, and many more classics that I may have left to later years and classroom requirements. If nothing else, it put me just ahead of most of my fellow students who actually had to put time into reading the book for the first time. I just needed a refresher! I found new stories to love. And have continued to do so, as I generally hunt up the books on which movies are based.
And maybe there is the reason to do both. If you loved (or even were simply entertained by) the movie, now allow it to replay in your mind. Sometimes you may find the hero (or heroine) taking on the physical characteristics of the actor(s). (I will confess, I cannot read Pride and Prejudice without seeing Colin Firth as Mr. Darcy. Nor do the 2 main characters in The Bridges of Madison County ever look like anyone other than Clint Eastwood and Meryl Streep). You may, as I did, find so much more in the book that the story becomes an even better experience for you. Or you can simply use movies as teasers for your next read (although in doing so you’ve already experienced the “spoiler alert”).
Since I never feel that time spent reading is ever wasted or redundant, seeing the movie and reading the book (or vice versa) just gives me more to think about as I evaluate both the original and the cinematic conception of it.
So, what about my one, “I love the movie but am lukewarm about the book”, experience? The movie is my favorite film, Laura, with Dana Andrews and Gene Tierney. I was able to find the book soon after I saw the film and must confess, I was disappointed. (I do own the book, and periodically re-read it to see if my opinion has changed-it hasn’t). Though the movie is true to the plot, the characters in the book, for once, don’t ever come alive to me. Even trying to visualize the actors as the characters doesn’t work.
Perhaps it’s the Noir atmosphere of the film (although I have no trouble with other Noir books/movies). Perhaps it’s the writing style. I don’t know. It remains, so far, the one “the film is better” that I have experienced. I guess I’ll just have to continue reading and watching to see if there is a number two in my future.
Do yourself a literary and cinematic favor. Make the comparisons. Read and view and experience on different levels. Be your own critic!
Kate Dombrowski,
Greendale Public Library Board President
