Book vs. Movie

Writing came first. It was how caveman would communicate with each other rather than loud sounds of "Ohh" and "Ahh" and "Mmm". Then as time advanced...really advanced, humans began to write books and journals that would tell tales of heroic men like Odysseus' journey in The Odyssey and The Illiad. This is an example of a traditional story that has been passed down through centuries through written and spoken word. One could even argue that the reason it has been passed down through so many centuries and cultures is because of its explicit details that tell the tale of a man who fights through wars and evil beings just to take back his homeland. However, when man, or woman, discovered the idea of film and pictures in motion, a new breed of story telling was born. While it is not something that has replaced written word, it is a form of entertainment that has certainly gained the attention of the world.

Movies, films, or whatever you want to call them, are just plain different then books. The biggest difference is that they don't leave anything up to the audience member, which for some is a good thing and for others is a bad thing. With any movie, their is a director who creates the story with his image in mind. He, along with a producer, assigns a cast, a setting, and everything else that goes along with the movie. With a book, the author basically sets the stage for a reader to let his mind wander. While a story is told, it is up the reader to figure out what the location looks like, the physical description of characters, and just about everything else that makes up a novel. So the real question is, what form of entertainment really gives the best depiction of an epic story and gives the reader a true experience of the events that unfold?

The fact of the matter is that there is no perfect answer to this question. I personally could think of examples to counter each side of the argument and would basically find myself in a chicken or the egg situation. While something like Lance Armstrong's biography, which has only been made into a book, is something that would clearly be better as a literary piece, a story like Miracle, the film about the 1980 US Hockey Team, is a piece of work that would be much better as a film. Everyone knows that Lance Armstrong's journey through life, both on and off the bike, has been difficult and amazing. However, I don't believe I would have a great experience watching him on a bike for an hour and in the hospital for another hour. Rather, hearing him explain his journey through written word is more compelling and gives a better depiction of his story. With that being said, a novel about the miracle team may not give a true depiction of how hard this group of men worked to achieve their goal. Rather, seeing these men give everything they have in a motion picture truly gives the viewer a real experience of what happened. In fact, I remember watching the movie with my father and him recounting the game the same way that it was portrayed in the movie. 

Language is a great tool that has been around as long as anyone can remember. There is a reason why it has survived this long and has not been replaced by another form. With that being said, it is not fair to say that language is the best way to give an account of a story. However, you could say the same about films. There is no clear cut answer in this quarrel and while for some it comes down to a matter of opinion, for me, I can't answer the question. I like both sides. Sometimes I like to read and sometimes I like to view a film. This debate will never be settled for sure. It is up to the authors and directors to keep making greats pieces of work so that this debate lives on forever.