The book was better

...

Welcome to Holla Forums

Are you talking about Gurm?

but books are better by default

((they)) usually make changes to fit their propaganda

so when people say the books are better, they are nt lying

what did he mean by this

you have to go away

i'll take pointless filler over retarded bastardizations of characters and plot elements please

also, the book usually makes more sense, even if it's boring at least its coherent

The Horny Shower Guy's adaptation was from shit to shit.

wut

You really can't compare a book to a movie, BUT If the movie is shit it usually is because of more than just ((executive meddling)).

Just listen to the audio book at 2x speed.

this, honestly

Hes right, pepe.

they actually have a lot in common. have you ever taken a moment to compare them?

...

Holla Forums really is the worst board

...

Worldbuilding is a meme, it's like setting but pointless

But there isn't. Or if there is, it's dumbed down for TV consumption. Television will always supply the viewer with less information than a book, it's just a limitation of the medium.
If you have any actual examples, feel free to trot them out.

this man unironically believes the prequels were kino

No I'm the user who says the prequels arent kino lad….

You don't into film I'm sorry. But a film can be loads better than a book. But they are actually both very different mediums.

So tell me how a movie can impart more information than a television show. As far as I can tell, a movie is just a short TV show on a big screen.

For one television shows have literal shit direction and are usually just expository and are dragged out, have pointless storylines and side plots everything under the sun that makes it shitty. Stop watching television shows.

Lol enjoy your shit tv

Lets see I have this nice book here should I
(a) film the exact same stuff as the book and waste my time when we already have the fucking book to read if we wanted
(b) take liberties and make the best film I can

I don't watch television, Holla Forums. Nor do I watch movies. I find them to be far too passive forms of entertainment for me. At best, I get drunk and watch things with my friends and talk shit about it.

Who reads anymore? What is this the 1890s? Buy a television poorfags.

Yea no shit I can tell you dont watch television or movies because you asked me how they are different. Thats because you have never watched anything good.

It's all relative, the main point is that there are many varieties of apples, but none of them are anything like an orange. Much like how many varieties of books, but no book is like a movie.

>not Holla Forums
Televisions and movies are not inherently different mediums. If you showed a 30 hour long film in 2 hour chunks every day for a couple weeks, how is that different from a television show? The difference between television and movies is FAR closer than between any other medium. It's like comparing a book to a magazine. The biggest difference is in how you distribute the content.

Cinema is a superior artform.

You really dont get it and its because you dont watch television or films but television feels like television and a film feels like a film.

no

Books usually don't translate to visual media well if done word by word. The pace is different and chars don't have the benefit of complete physical reveal.

Yes.

...