[ 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: 70 KB, 640x480, 1375044653116.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4006240 No.4006240[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

I, like most of the people, don't have time to read all the great classics of literature.
Are there film adaptations of classics that are so awesome you should watch them instead of reading the book?

>> No.4006245

>>4006240
>don't have time to read all the great classics of literature.
yes you do shut the fuck up and get started

>> No.4006248

if you can make time for film you can make time for literature. You're just not putting the effort to do so and you're not placing an appropriate amount of value on literature. Although, it's quite clear you're not putting an appropriate amount of value on film as well so I don't know what you're doing.

>> No.4006256

>>4006240
>ugly teeth
>uneven tits
no

>> No.4006270
File: 38 KB, 625x626, 1372461052617.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4006270

>attention whore pic
>fedora-tier question

noice try m8

>> No.4006349

sauce plz

>> No.4006358
File: 224 KB, 1023x1280, 2-out-of-10-girl-would-not-bang-5.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4006358

>>4006256

>> No.4006371

>>4006349
Some chick in thread on /lit/ where people were posting their favorite book over their naked selves.

From what little I can see, this chick is like at least an 8/10 for me. Dunno why.
I'l never get to meet her.

>> No.4006386

>>4006371
damn dude. i would hit that with the fury of a thousand vikings

>> No.4006394

What book is the girl holding in OP's picture?

>> No.4006397

>>4006394
i'm pretty sure that signature isn't the title and if that's true, then there's no discernible features to go off of.

>> No.4006436

>>4006394
Lady Gaga.

>> No.4006447
File: 200 KB, 394x453, 1799 - Self Portrait.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4006447

>>4006240
>film adaptations
Literally no point
Read the book
0/10 apply yourself you plebeian.

>> No.4006450

>>4006447
many good films are adaptations of another medium, but they generally aren't valuable for the same reasons that other medium found merit.

>> No.4006454

she looks eerily like the girl i'm currently dating. smaller tits, but the same goofy (but still cute) smile. mine doesn't read though.

>> No.4006458

>>4006450
movies based on other things are often more valuable than the source material. However, in the case of a movie adapted from a novel it is impossible for the movie to be as valuable as the book. By choosing the film over the book you are opting for a diluted, inferior version of the story.

>> No.4006461

>>4006454
I know a bunch of girls with the same smile, it's not particularly rare. I actually know a girl who posts on /lit/, and I was wondering if the girl in OP's picture was her.

>> No.4006470

>>4006458
>However, in the case of a movie adapted from a novel it is impossible for the movie to be as valuable as the book. By choosing the film over the book you are opting for a diluted, inferior version of the story.
But that's entirely untrue. A good adaptation doesn't try to be the book, and doesn't try to find its value in the same functions that the book does (because in doing so, it will no doubt fail as you describe it). It 'adapts' the book to the medium of film, it doesn't put the book in film form.

>> No.4006471

No film should be watched _instead_ of reading the book. For that to be the case, the film would have to somehow improve upon the book. Which is basically impossible for a classic-based film. Still, if you don't have time to read, many films based on classics are worth watching, even if you plan to go back and read the book later.

For some concrete examples, certainly any of the films of Shakespeare's plays are worth watching. I particularly enjoyed the 2010 Macbeth film with Patrick Stewart. The 2011 film Coriolanus is also an interesting interpretation of the original work.

Stepping away from Shakespeare, I'd say Apocalypse Now, Lord of Rings, The Godfather, any Stephen King-based film, Breakfast at Tiffany's, Lolita, Ben-Hur, Rashomon, Psycho, Frankenstein, and many more are films based on great books or classics (though not perhaps lit-certified classics) which are definitely worth watching.

There's no substitute for a classic book, but many films based on classics are worth watching in their own right and will give you a good sense of the plot.

>> No.4006473

>>4006470
in which case you can't watch the film instead of reading the book.

>> No.4006476
File: 95 KB, 481x330, faust and mephistopheles.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4006476

>>4006450
Right, but direct adaptations of books (trying to literally recreate the book in film) are virtually never good.

Take, for example, Ikiru. Amazing film. Although it draws some of its elements, plot developments, characters, and themes from Faust, it's still a creative and independent work of art in its own right.

But if, say, Kurosawa didn't implement his own emotions or thoughts into the film and merely tried to recreate Faust, there would (probably) have been no point in watching the film over reading the story.

This is what separates respectful intertextuality from petty adaptation.

>> No.4006477

>>4006240
What do you mean, you don't have time? Unless you're raising a kid or working 60+ hours a week you have time. Turn off the TV and read instead.

Never watch a film instead of a book, completely different mediums. An adaptation may be great but it's still nothing like the book on a fundamental level.

>> No.4006479

>>4006473
Yes, that was my original point. That there is still point in watching film adaptations, just not to do what OP wants to do. It's not there to replace the book.
To be honest though, rereading celeb's post I have no idea why I thought he was saying to avoid film adaptations simply because their film adaptations rather than not using film adaptations as a replacement to the book

>> No.4006482

I'm >>4006471
The other thing I'd say is that as films do not supersede the books they're based on, so too books to do not supersede the films.

Heart of Darkness is an amazing work, but it could never be said to supersede Apocalypse Now. In fact, if anyone watches or reads one of them, I'd recommend watching or reading the other right after.

>> No.4006483

Well, Apocalypse Now is a very good adaptation
If you read the book in one sitting, you'd probably have finished it before the film was over.

>> No.4006484

read what interests you.

you shouldn't need to read classics because they are classics. They are too many across too many genres and sub genres

>> No.4006485

>>4006471
I think I prefer Apocalypse Now to Heart of Darkness, and I'm not even that into movies

>> No.4006488

>>4006485
you're probably a pleb then.

>> No.4006491

>>4006489
I think we can all agree the movie adaptation of Dorian Grey was a master piece on par with Wilde's original work. though.

>> No.4006490

an adaptation can never be better than the original.

>> No.4006496

>>4006490
Palahniuk says that the film Fight Club is better than the book

>> No.4006499

>>4006496
i think that the purpose of this thread was to discuss classics

>> No.4006502
File: 46 KB, 244x662, 1370663749814.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4006502

>>4006499

>> No.4006519

>>4006483
Really? It may be short but it's as dense as all hell, take your time, get lost in it - enjoy it.

>> No.4006523
File: 107 KB, 800x598, 1335838589434.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4006523

the feeling when you will never experience labial relations with fellow c/lit/s

Frankenstein, anything by Kenneth Branagh really

>> No.4006638

>>4006240
Yes, you do have time. Maybe for not reading every of them, but you don't have to read the ones you don't like. You know, reading is a pleasure, not an obligation, anyway.

>> No.4006754

>>4006458
>The Godfather
>Into The Wild
>Dexter
>Blade Runner
>Jurassic Park
>The Shawshank Redemption

Just a few examples of films/shows that are easily better than the books they are based on. Why do you think it is "impossible" for a movie to be more valuable than a book it is based on? Crappy novels can be turned into good movies. A director can take the good ideas from a book and turn it into something much greater than the original author ever achieved.

>> No.4006783

>>4006482
Heart of Darkness/Apocalypse now is perhaps the greatest example ever of adapting a book for a new medium. Heart of Darkness is as perfect as a novella can be, and Apocalypse now is as perfect as a film can be. Heart of Darkness uses the strength of its medium to conduct a sort of psychological study and mystery story, while Apocalypse Now uses the strength of its medium to tell the same story using disturbing action sequences and the visual aspects of warfare.

>> No.4006788

>>4006496
Nobody gives a shit what Hack Palahniuk thinks, says or does.

>> No.4006792

>>4006484
If you consider campy scifi novels classics.

>> No.4006794

>>4006754
Anything based off the works of Thomas Harris too. The books are dogshit.

>> No.4006797

>>4006488
Well, Apocalypse Now is one of the greatest films ever made so you can't really fault him. Both are fantastic.

>> No.4006827

It's funny because I prefer to read books for the exact same reason you claim to prefer movies.

A book I can pick up whenever I want, and put down whenever I want without losing a second of the story.

With a movie, you've got to find two to three hours to set aside specifically to watch the movie.

Also, where did this picture from?

>> No.4006838

>>4006827
See
>>4006371

>> No.4006843

>>4006838
Yeah, I noticed that.
I've got a habit of replying to threads and then reading the replies.

>> No.4006881

>>4006371
Every time i see that pic I die inside a little from the effort to repress my urge to fuck her brains out.

>> No.4006922

>>4006827
Can you not just pause a movie and continue watching later? I sometimes do this if I find that a movie is longer than expected and I started late. I would rather watch it when I am fresh than be fighting off sleep.

Some people might say you lose your immersion, but the same could be said for books. I watched Ju-on over the course of two nights and I still was scared shitless the second night.

>> No.4007135

>Defined chin
>Shapely lips
>Great hair
>Perfect complexion
>Not too skinny, but attractive display of shoulderblades
>Perky, shapely breasts
>Gets hot for books

8/10 so would bang

Fucking virgins.

>> No.4007141

>>4006523

Walter White could bang any c/lit/ he wanted, sorry buddy.

>> No.4007152

>>4007141
I'd take Hal over Walter any day, so there.

>> No.4007155

>>4007152

Heh, classy.

Wait

RU GRILL?!

>> No.4007164

>>4007155
don't be silly anon, grills aren't allowed on the internets. if there were grills on the internets, we'd all be grills. and if western culture has taught you anything, you should know no lois is a true grill any way.

>> No.4007180

>>4007164

I don't follow. So there's no phony doting on a 5/10 and then getting my dick sucked before cutting off all contact in my future... or what?

>> No.4007210

>>4007180
i only post my hair in return for decadence on this board since it's sfw and i like books.
if i want to be rated over9000 i go to >>>/soc/ or >>>/b/