interesting and well-spoken, though, of course, i disagree. :) not about the movie-first-book-second-can't-ruin-the-book theory, that holds water, but i'll always like books better than movies.
i will add that i read differently if i've seen the movie first, and occasionally i find myself doubting the author and saying "that's not how that happened!" which is pretty funny considering the order of creation. personally i think it would be tragic for one to have seen LOTR before reading it. tolkien's vision, while wonderfully adapted by PJ, could never really, truly, completely fit in a film, plus there is something wonderful about being able to see things for yourself before seeing what someone else saw in the same piece of literature. ach, just my tuppence.
phin, why didn't you tell me scott had such an airtight alibi? i've crusaded for nothing! :)
Re: My Harry Potter stance
Date: 2002-07-09 01:39 pm (UTC)i will add that i read differently if i've seen the movie first, and occasionally i find myself doubting the author and saying "that's not how that happened!" which is pretty funny considering the order of creation. personally i think it would be tragic for one to have seen LOTR before reading it. tolkien's vision, while wonderfully adapted by PJ, could never really, truly, completely fit in a film, plus there is something wonderful about being able to see things for yourself before seeing what someone else saw in the same piece of literature. ach, just my tuppence.
phin, why didn't you tell me scott had such an airtight alibi? i've crusaded for nothing! :)