Poll

I'll admit I watched the Harry Potter movie for Sorcerer's Stone and then read the series. It helped me paint the picture of what everything looks like.

Generally before, though that of course usually makes me disappointed in the film. Sometimes, however, a good movie will definitely make me want to pick up the book because I assume it's better. :) I don't mind having actors' faces in my head when I read. I'm very visual so, as long as I didn't *hate* the performance, I like having that visual in my head when I read.

ETA: Despite the actual vote results, I'm loving the great variety of answers! :)

Bonnie wrote: "Generally before, though that of course usually makes me disappointed in the film. Sometimes, however, a good movie will definitely make me want to pick up the book because I assume it's better. :..."

I feel this way too. And, for me, it's often, "Wow, this movie wasn't that great, but the setting/idea has so much potential! I want to read the book so I can actually explore that potential!"

I am also enjoying the variety of responses in the comments. It's neat to see the reasoning for why things work for those they work for.

read a book the other day and watched the movie afterwards, not likely to happen again. I was super disappointed with the movie.

I understand/get more out of the movie if I read the book first. Sometimes I am disappointed with the movie. (But not "The Help") Liked the book and super enjoyed the movie (twice).

Have you ever read a book which was published based on the movie? I've always been let down by the book in those cases. It's the simulacrum effect. Something gets lost in the translation.

Gwen wrote: "I'm more likely to enjoy both if I read the book second. If I read it first, the movie is more likely to let me down."

I'm the same way. I did an experiment this summer and found that I enjoyed both the book and the film if I waited to read the book after watching the movie.

I try to read the books before the movie, but it always seems to work the other way around. I prefer reading before the movie though.

If the movie is any good, the book will be better. If the book is good, the movie will probably not live up to the reader's expectations. The worst thing I can do is watch a movie right after reading the book it's based on. I can watch the movie version after I've forgotten the book's strong points. Otherwise, I can't enjoy it.

Most of the time I prefer to read the book before the film. When I do so, I often opt not to see the film for fear it will be spoiled by Hollywood. Occasionally, I am so intrigued by a film that I will then read the book. I did so with PRINCE OF TIDES and then became an avid Pat Conroy fan.

Most of the time I prefer to read the book before, but it usually ruins the movie, which is okay because I prefer books. However, sometimes if I read the book after it helps me to understand more complex storyline if I can see it played out.

There has only been one time that I found that I liked the movie for more than I did the book and that was, "The Lord Of The Rings" trilogy. Jackson put so much more action in the movie than there was in the book.

Alas, some of the books didn't even make it into the movie.

I agree that the movie is always a disappointment if you read the book first. However, I don't like having the book spoilt for me if I watch the film first.

The books are usually better than the movies, therefore I prefer to read the books after I've seen the movie. In that way I can enjoy both the movie and the book, instead of obsessing over which elements of the book that are missing in the movie.

I always read the book first and I am ALWAYS disappointed by the movie. It truly is never as good. I don't know why I insist on torturing myself, but there you have it. One exception was "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe", that movie was amazing!

A movie never matches the richness of detail that a book contains. For me, having read a book before the movie informs me and makes the movie that much better. But then, I am not one to be let down by a movie. The movie is a format that lends itself to highlights, the book to details.

Diana wrote: "If I watch a movie before the book, I'm more likely to not read the book at all because I already know the ending..."

Many times the movie's ending is completely different from the book's ending, so if you were interested in the book before you saw the movie, it is often fun to read the book anyway - you may be surprised!

Most of the time the movie is a disappointment to the book. Most of the time, If I know it's a book into movie, I don't even bother to read the book if it's a movie I am really looking forward to.

If it's a book I read and they turn it into a movie, I will watch it.

If it's a movie I watched and later found out it's a book I will read the book if I liked the movie.

So it depends on the book/the movie and if I liked it or not. I'm not one that will rush out and get a book and read it if I know it's coming out to movie soon. I like going into movies unbiased and if you have read the book, you have imagined it a certain way and 9/10 you will come away with things that should have been in the movie but there wasn't time/movie/didn't fit in the plot that the movie was going.

I like to read a book before watching a movie, because that way I have something to expect.

I found out that if I watch the movie after reading the book I am more disappointed. So I watch the movie first and am not disappointed at all.

I prefer to read the book first. The only film based on a book that I have ever really nitpicked was the Twilight series.

The only time it worked out really well for me to see the movie first was for To Kill a Mockingbird. I saw the movie when I was nine when it was brand new, and then didn't read the book until I was 12 (or 11?) which was the perfect age to read the book. The movie was so well done that I was fine with reading the book after seeing the movie. BUT, every other time, it's definitely book first! And sometimes book only.

I like to read the book first. That way, if the movie is missing something or doesn't follow the book at least I feel like I still know what's going on. I find that if I watch the movie first I just never get around to the book

I read the Harry Potter books after the first film and ended up loving the series even more because of that (I didn't have to imagine Hogwarts, it was done for me now so I read the books with all those characters in mind too). But I read the Time Traveller's Wife first and then was a bit disappointed by the film. I think it depends on how much you like the book because I HATED Order of the Pheonix but LOVED the movie. It's such a toss up.

Depends on the book and whether I think I'd like it. If book is good and the sort of thing I'd like, I make sure I read the book first.

Reading the book AFTER gives the advantage of having more detailed visuals of characters and places, but you may not always like the visuals you get. The movie could be disappointing after the book, but you get used to it. Also, if I already know the story, I'm less likely to finish the book, and for this reason mainly, I like to read the book first.

i like reading the book(s) before because then I can relate to the movie and know whats coming!

Same with me. If I watch the movie first I feel like there is no reason to read the book.

i do 2

what Gwen said for sure!!

If I watch the movie first (like I did with Marley and Me) I still enjoy reading the book! But I still perfer to read the books first!

Normally Movie is the reason to read book. Because I know the book is better ^.^v

If I read the Book before I saw the Movie, is the Film deeply disappointed.

I think better is to read the book and never seen the Movie.

actually, if i read the book first, the movie will make me upset but if i watch the movie first, i'm always influenced by imagines of actors and actresses in the movie

I have this RULE where I don't watch movie after I read the book, or read the book after watching movie.


If book is first than in movie I just notice what did they do different, or leave out, or compare characters to ones I imagined while I was reading.
I movie is first than I'm just irritated by images from movie that I can't get out of my mind and can't really get into story.

And I prefer to experience the original, so if movie was made by the book, than book first. If book was written after movie was successful, than movie. so it is quite difficult question.. :D
But, in general: BOOKS > MOVIES.

I very much enjoy reading the book after seeing the movie, that way I am not disappointed. Too many times I have read the book first and had a hard time reconizing it as the same.

I like to read before, then I can read it with no preconceptions - the characters are from my imagination.
Of course then I'm less likely to watch the film, unless, in keeping with most of my film watching, it's so many years after it's released that I only remember the major events!
I remember at school watching "Far From the Madding Crowd" with Alan Bates...the entire class were picking up where it differed from the book. I don't think we appreciated the film at all!

I try to see them as two different things (or versions). Although I have read the book
just because I enjoyed the movie, two times now.. First after I watched "Flipped", and then "The Help".

I'm a both kind of person. If it's a good book I'll go see the movie, and if it's a good movie I'll read the book. If I had to choose only one, I'd choose before. I like using my imagination with books to create the characters in my head. My imagined characters rarely match what I get on screen.

I generally agree with the other comments about movies so often being a letdown ... but, every now and again, I'm pleasantly surprised. (Of course, this is where the movie is based on the book and not the other way around!)

Of course a book is going to have much more detail, especially those that include a lot of the protagonist's thoughts, which are so difficult to translate into movie action. For me, though, in addition to that, I tend to visualize when I'm reading, so it's very disappointing when the creators of a film don't share my "view" of how the characters, settings, etc. should look (and, worse, if their casting choices are significantly different than who I'd have picked for the roles!).

I like to read the book first so that I can get a mental picture of what the author intended. Movie makers always have to sacrifice some aspect of the character because it's hard to find an actor who completely fits a role. Sometimes they totally miss the mark. I read the Alex Cross series by Patterson after I had seen the movie. Even though I love Morgan Freeman, he was not Alex Cross. Oh, and Tom Cruise as Jack Reacher. Need I say more.

I missed the poll, but I must say I prefer to read the book after the movie if I have not already read it. I am a bit of a perfectionist and tend to pick the movie to pieces for not matching the book, what bits have been cut out, changed, etc. The books being usually much more detailed than the movies, it is much easier to enjoy the movie without comparing it to the book.

But I don't think I've actually seen a lot of movies based on books I've read. I purposely avoided The Time Traveler's Wife because the book blew me away and the movie didn't look very good and I didn't want the book ruined for me. And the actors looked nothing like Claire and Henry!

Then again with Lord Of The Rings I read the books first and the movie was so true to them, it never let me down. And it was so good it looked better than I imagined! And Aragorn looked the spitting image of how I imagined him so I was pretty happy with that.

But I also agree with what Lyrpa said too. I always have such a strong image of what everything in a book looks like.

i like to read it before the movie

i like to read the book before i watch the movie

I try to always watch the movie first. When I read books I presume mental images of the characters and places; if I then proceed to watch the movie I'll be frustrated when they aren't congruent. But if I watch the movie first, the movie creates the images, and then whatever the description in the book, it is much easier to ignore and maintain what is in my mind. As far as plot goes though, I generally assume films to be reimaginings; many people tend to be disappointed with film adaptations...not sure why :P

I prefer to read the book first. I like to make the characters into what I think they should be. If I watch the movie first, I tend to see what the producers created.

I usually prefer reading the book first. This view applies to plays too. I don't know how anyone would understand the Les Miserable play or movie unless they first read the book. Movies usually cannot include all of the story, so I believe the movie is enriched by reading the book first.

I would rather read the book first, I've tried reading books after and find it annoying that I know what is going to happen next and that they have changed it in places. There's no point in reading when you know what's going to happen

I prefer reading the book before I watch the film. If I watch the film first, I don't usually appreciate the book as much.

I enjoy reading a book after I see a trailer, I think its easier to plant faces into the characters for the reason that i don't have a good imagination