[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 650 KB, 1014x811, 12362398723487349.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2556491 No.2556491 [Reply] [Original]

Straight from /tv/. Just here to say that watching movies is ten times better than reading a book. Come at me faggots.

>> No.2556500

True. Books take longer to consume and nowadays they're just as formulaic as tv shows.

>> No.2556510

Disgraceful. Go back to the shithole you came from and leave us alone.

>> No.2556513

I agree, excluding nonfiction. And please sir, we may be homosexuals here at /lit/, but there's no need for the language.

>> No.2556520
File: 88 KB, 350x350, 1331513509104.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2556520

>>2556510

Give me 5 reasons a book is better than a movie?

>> No.2556521

While books do require more patience than movies or television, they can be just as rewarding and offer layers of depth that the moving pictures will never be able to match.
There is no arguing this.

>> No.2556523

/lit/'s taste in movies is better than /tv''s, though.

Even still, we know how films fail to capture the timeless like good literature does.

>> No.2556527

inb4 a million replies

c'mon /lit/, show this guy how fucking stupid you are by actually taking this thread seriously. you know you want to.

>> No.2556529

>>2556523

I'm not surprised by that. There are a lot of plebs on /tv/. It can be exhausting sometimes, that's why I decided to bother you guys

>> No.2556531

What scale are we talking here? Is a book like 100 satisfactions and TV is a 1000? Or 1000, and 10,000? If it's the latter, I'm really skeptical that TV is 10,0000 satisfactions.

>> No.2556534
File: 20 KB, 750x750, myfeel.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2556534

>that feel when the movie comes out and obliterates your headcannon

>> No.2556539

Furthermore, books offer unlimited possibilities. The aspirations of film makers, on the other hand, will forever be limited and restrained by the capabilities of actors, innumerable members of the support crew, and the depths of the studio coffers.

>> No.2556540

>>2556527

>a million replies

I can be a legend.

>>2556531

Whatever you want bro.

>> No.2556547

>>2556540
If you want that many replies, you better start rustling more jimmies

>> No.2556552

>>2556539

>The aspirations of film makers, on the other hand, will forever be limited and restrained by the capabilities of actors

I respectfully disagree. I think that what offers more distance in a movie. Different outlooks.

>> No.2556555
File: 28 KB, 404x267, 1331606721144.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2556555

>2012
>Still trying to sage

>> No.2556565

>>2556547

I figured my argument would rustle a lot of jimmies. Quite the contrary. This board is boring.

>> No.2556571

>>2556565
it's the slowest board on 4chan.

>> No.2556573

>>2556571
obviously you've never been on /p/ /po/ or /hr/

>> No.2556574

>>2556571

Makes sense.

>> No.2556591

>>2556573
This is true. I was wrong. Very very wrong.

>> No.2556595

Books and movies are two different mediums that offer different strengths, weaknesses and possibilities for expression and storytelling. Books can do things that movies can't and movies can do things that books can't. It's understandable to prefer one over the other, but why hold them against each other?

Wait, I think I'm doing this wrong

>> No.2556622

>>2556595
/thread