Books, books, books.

[rogueslayer452]

Taken from thefridayfive:


01. What was your favorite book during childhood?
I read Matilda by Roald Dahl in fifth grade, and I wanted so badly to achieve my own telekinetic powers (and still try to do this every so often, to no avail). During my childhood and adolescence I also really liked several book series, including but limited to: Goosebumps by R.L. Stine, The Babysitters Club by Ann M. Martin, Animorphs by K.A. Applegate, and Fearless by Francine Pascal.

02. What is your favorite book now?
Oh goodness, there's quite a few. To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee, Harry Potter by J.K. Rowling, Out by Natsuo Kirino, Foxfire: Confessions of a Girl Gang by Joyce Carol Oates and Battle Royale by Koushun Takami are ones that have really made an impression on me. Also Flowers in the Attic, which I first read in junior high, still holds up today as one of my favorites. Most earlier works of V.C. Andrews do, in fact. Currently at the moment I'm really enjoying Revenge by Yoko Ogawa, which is a short horror anthology and is brilliantly unnerving.

03. What is your favorite movie adaptation of a book?
Harry Potter, Battle Royale, The Hunger Games, Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit. I base this on the entertainment value and bringing these universes to life instead of how 100% accurate they were to the source material, if that makes any sense.

4. Do you prefer checking out books from the library or buying them?
It's been a long, long time since I've checked anything out from a library. If I want to get a book I either go into a bookstore, browse, pick up something that peaks my interest, flip through it, and then decide whether it's good enough to buy. Also, searching and looking up things online and buying that way.

05. Have you ever been let down by a book that was highly recommended to you?
I don't think letdown is the right word, more like disappointed that I couldn't get into it. There are some books out there that I'm sure are incredible, but unfortunately I cannot get into or don't like the particular writing style the author has chosen. And I have tried with some of the most widely recommended books (Lord of the Rings, Kushiel's Dart), and I do feel bad because I know the story and the world-building is amazing, but sadly my brain cannot comprehend that style of writing for some reason.

Comments

[nemophilist.livejournal.com]

I really want to see Battle Royale! I didn't even know there was a book, though.

The Lord of the Rings will always be a great work and achievement, but holy shit is it dry and dull in places. The film was loads better.

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

Oh yes, I remember after watching Battle Royale I wanted to read the book and had to request it specifically since it wasn't available at the local Borders at the time. Now it's practically everywhere, lol.

Yeah, Tolkien was quite remarkable with his world-building and I admire his work, but his writing could become quite complicated if you're not used to reading in that kind of style. I'm just not equipped for it, in truth. I tend to just read the cliffnotes version, if anything. And it's why I enjoy the films because they not only condense the material for better understanding but also make it more enjoyable.

[mountingsnow.livejournal.com]

Foxfire: Confessions of a Girl Gang, sounds like the most amazing thing ever.

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

I highly recommend it. It's a fascinating read and it has plenty of feminist themes. :)

[xfirefly9x.livejournal.com]

Goosebumps, Animorphs, and Fearless. I read those growing up too. XD

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

I feel like for kids from my generation there are certain books that were the epitome of our childhoods, and that even if you didn't read them you knew about them; Babysitters Club, Goosebumps and Animorphs were part of that. :)

[ragnarok-08.livejournal.com]

I love the book Matilda *^^*

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

I haven't revisited the book in a while. Perhaps I should at some point.

The movie was also a favorite of mine, too. It's also a film adaptation of the book that I enjoyed thoroughly. :)

[rhoda-rants.livejournal.com]

Ah, the "Reading Rainbow" song immediately started playing in my head! ♥

I love Battle Royale--definitely one of the most perversely entertaining action movies out there. And I was SO thrilled when Anchor Bay finally picked it up and got it a wide release in the US; I'd been hunting for it for YEARS when that happened.

Harry Potter is IMO the best book-to-film adaptation out there. They just nailed all the characters, and the feel of the universe, so it really doesn't bother me that some details didn't quite make it.

And I still have my Goosebumps collection.

ETA: OH, and libraries are awesome. They have movies, too! And TV shows! Check it out next time Netflix or Hulu or whoever pulls something you've been meaning to marathon.

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

And I was SO thrilled when Anchor Bay finally picked it up and got it a wide release in the US; I'd been hunting for it for YEARS when that happened.

Interesting, I looked it up when they officially released it and it was rather recent, right? I remember getting my DVD of Battle Royale in the early 00s when I discovered it. I think it was one of the imported ones, because it was the director's cut and had English subtitles. Perhaps I should upgrade so I can get all the extra goodies (plus, I hadn't seen the sequel to it, which I heard wasn't as good as the first).

Harry Potter is IMO the best book-to-film adaptation out there. They just nailed all the characters, and the feel of the universe, so it really doesn't bother me that some details didn't quite make it.

For me I separate the books and the movies, it's much better that way to avoid any kind of nitpicking or arguments that people have about book versus the films (which still happen, believe it or not). As far as adaptations go it wasn't the best and definitely not perfect, but nevertheless I cannot see anything else replacing it in any kind of reboot in the near future. They were entertaining for what they were, they brought a generation of Potterheads into celebrating the series regardless, and that is good enough for me.

(Also, I know people had issues with some of the casting choices, but after all this time Daniel, Emma and Rupert will always be Harry, Hermione and Ron. And nobody can replace Jason Isaacs as Lucius Malfoy, nobody.)

OH, and libraries are awesome. They have movies, too! And TV shows!

My sister is the one in the family who constantly goes to the library to check out books, and she has had many things requested with the movie/television stuff as well. It's how we finally got chance to marathon all the seasons of Parks and Rec and check out Miss Fisher's Murder Mysteries. :)

[rhoda-rants.livejournal.com]

I found a copy of the import once, but it was used and it kept skipping scenes, so I gave up the hunt until the Anchor Bay release happened. I *think* it's the Director's Cut, but it's the only version I've seen so I can't really compare them. (And I haven't seen the sequel either; if the book doesn't have a sequel itself, it just seems superfluous.)

For me I separate the books and the movies, it's much better that way to avoid any kind of nitpicking or arguments that people have about book versus the films (which still happen, believe it or not).
Oh I believe it! That's one reason I stay the hell out of fandom, and contain my squee to my LJ and that's about it. I separate them as well because film and literature are different mediums--what works in one is not going to work in the other. It's not a perfect adaptation, because they never are, but they clearly made a solid effort and cared deeply about the material, communicating with the author about her wishes and things she didn't include in the books, which doesn't always happen in adaptations.

[sakuraberries]

ah, Kushiel's Dart! I forced myself 500 pages into that book before I just couldn't do it anymore. And after going onto their wiki and looking up what happens after, I didn't regret it.

Meanwhile I couldn't even get through ten pages of LotR.

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

I attempted to read it during junior year in high school. I reread the first two chapters before I eventually gave up. From my understanding, the first book was essentially a massive information dump. I knew it came highly recommended, which reading what it's about I could understand why. Interestingly enough it's been in circulation again as a way of people finding better alternatives and substitutes from the whole FSOG nonsense.

I still have the book, perhaps I could try reading it again. But I just go to my sister for further information about it, since she's read pretty much the entire Kushiel series. Heh.

The Hobbit is much easier to read than LOTR. Granted it's a children's book, but still. And then you have The Silmarillion....

[geek-flower.livejournal.com]

I pretty much read everything you did as a kid. Wishbone was my favorite series and To Kill a Mockingbird was my favorite stand-alone novel.

I had NO idea that Battle Royale was based on a book!

I'm like you. I have fond memories of visits to the library as a kid, though. Checking out the books I picked out was the first time I remember feeling "grown up". lol

It's funny you should mention Lord of the Rings. I've recently decided to try and read Lord of the Rings again. I tried to read it as a teenager, but was unable to get through the insane amount of detail that always pops up in Tolkien's writing. I made it through the first book, but that was it. No need to feel bad about it. As for me, I find John Green's books to be a big let down. The only thing I've made it through is "The Fault in Our Stars". It was my first exposure to him and I was happy with it, until I realized that most of his stories, in my opinion, are just the same thing in a different context. I don't feel bad about it. If we love everything we read, then either we aren't breaking out of our comfort zone, or we are missing the whole point of reading. :)

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

Awww, Wishbone. I used to watch that quite a bit as well.

I had NO idea that Battle Royale was based on a book!

It was, and the book goes into even further detail about the things that happened with individual characters and their points of view, and a better understanding of the world they live in. I highly recommend checking it out when you have the time, it's really good. There's also a manga that was created from the book as well, though that is even more explicitly graphic in the violence and sexual content.

It's interesting the things you learn that were originally based on a book. The Ring (or Ringu), for example, was from a book series as well.

I made it through the first book, but that was it. No need to feel bad about it.

I feel like I better appreciate how passionate Tolkien was in creating this world than anything else. I like reading up on that process and everything else involved in that, but the actual written style of his is kind of a doozy to get through. The Hobbit I read, LOTR I tried but failed, and don't get me started on The Silmarillion (I read the cliffnotes anyway). I think it's why I adore the films as much as I do; purists will rant and seethe, but the films managed to capture this vast world that Tolkien created to basically perfection and it's possibly the best book-to-film adaptation we'll ever have on this scale.

It was my first exposure to him and I was happy with it, until I realized that most of his stories, in my opinion, are just the same thing in a different context.

Yeah, there are definitely some authors out there that kind of write the same thing over and over. You'll pick up one book and like it, but once picking up their other works you start to notice that pattern. Sometimes it's not that obvious, but other times it's too predicable. It's like same shit, just different setting; rinse, lather, repeat.

[eowyn.livejournal.com]

Cool meme!

Our childhood tastes were very similar - I wasn't into Animorphs, but I was into a different set of Francine Pascal books! Have you ever visited the bsc snark community here? It's good fun.

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

Heh, yeah I've visited bsc_snark every now and then. It's kind of fun to revisit old childhood favorites and have a good laugh, mostly to point out the ridiculous things because even if we loved something, in hindsight it's like WTF was even happening, lol.

Did you watch the shortly lived TV show back in the 90s? I loved it. I wished it had gone on longer. Hell, I wish there were DVDs for it.

[eowyn.livejournal.com]

It's so much fun. It's nice to know I wasn't the only one wtfing those books!

It didn't screen here. I've only seen it through snarks on that comm!

[elizalavelle.livejournal.com]

Yes to movies bringing book universes to life. It's pretty impossible to b 100% accurate but if the world feels right that makes a huge difference.

I read the first LoTR book and hated the style. The story was good but I could not enjoy the book. I also can't read The Hobbit. There's just something in the style of the book that does not resonate for me.

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I think if something has an understanding of the world and the characters and remains true to the spirit of the source material, it shouldn't matter. There will always be naysayers and nitpickers regardless though.

I prefer The Hobbit to LOTR because it's easier to understand. Granted, because I'm in love with the movies it added a bit more to my interest in reading it so, heh. ;)

[woodycakes.livejournal.com]

I loved the Harry Potter movies, too. I know not everyone love stem and of course books >>> movies forever but this was really great

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

I treat the books and movies as separate entities, and I found it to be easier that way since the movies didn't always follow the books, but they were still magical regardless. They kept true to the heart of what the story was about.

Also, nobody could ever replace the Golden Trio and the other actors who portrayed the characters.

[batmarg.livejournal.com]

I think everyone was into the BSC at some point. Not sure why I never tried Animorphs.

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

Either they read it, watched the shortly lived show or the movie, or just simply knew of it. BSC was everywhere during the 90s. :3

[fancypopcorn.livejournal.com]

I really liked the Goosebumps books too! And while I never read any of the Animorphs books, I remember the covers very well. xD

I love the LOTR movies too and like many people, I've had trouble with the books. I tried to read them twice so far, and while I finished Fellowship the second time around (and actually enjoyed it a lot more compared to my first try), I gave up halfway through The Two Towers. I promised myself that someday I will actually finish them.
I might need to read Battle Royale, since I really liked the movie.
I think whether someone read the book or watched the movie first, also plays a part in which they prefer. At least it's like that for me. For example, I really like Kubrick's The Shining, but some people don't consider it a good adaptation (including Stephen King himself) of the book. However, I personally didn't care much for the book when I got around to reading it and much prefer the movie.

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

I kind of like that the Animorphs covers have become a meme nowadays, lol.

I think whether someone read the book or watched the movie first, also plays a part in which they prefer.

I agree. With me, I find that if I watch something first before reading the source material I'm less likely to be incredibly critical of the adaptation. I may not think it's an accurate portrayal once I have read the material afterwards, but I won't be so quick to nitpick easily at every little glaring detail. I often treat things as separate entities, and it makes things much easier to enjoy the different mediums of which the story is being told. For example, Girl, Interrupted was a wonderful film, but after reading the book I understand why the author herself disliked how the film depicted her life. I still love both despite that, though.

While there are certainly exceptions to this, I often try not to be overly critical or judgmental when it comes to adaptations, because sometimes deviating from the source material can actually improve the flow of the storytelling.

[omgpeyton.livejournal.com]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who could never really get into reading The Lord of The Rings trilogy. It's weird because I love that setting with wizards and sages and being in the woods, etc.. but I could never get into reading it. I can respect it though, of course.

I loved The Hobbit and for some reason, I still haven't been inspired to watch the movie because of the length, and my awful attention span! :P

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

I'm kind of weird because I love researching about what Tolkien did and his works and everything in relation to Middle-earth, but reading the actual material itself is kind of a chore because that writing style just isn't for me. I prefer cliffnotes and kind of an easier way of understanding that vast universe that he created. To purists that might not make me a "real fan", but idgaf.

I loved The Hobbit and for some reason, I still haven't been inspired to watch the movie because of the length, and my awful attention span! :P

So I'm guessing you haven't seen the extended edition of the LOTR trilogy either, eh? ;p

[sictransits.livejournal.com]

The Hunger Games is probably my favorite movie adaptation of a book. They've just done a great job with the series and the casting was perfect imo.

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

This is one of those times where the movies improve the books, because first-person can be incredibly limiting and the films do a fantastic job at showing more of the characters and the world that was restricted from reading the books.

[giallarhorn.livejournal.com]

Oh gosh, Animorphs. I remember being so frustrated when the library would have missing volumes, ie #20-24, 27-30, and being so irritated because I really didn't want to just go out and buy those two missing books because then I'd feel the urge to get all of them.

The LOTR/Hobbit movies are probably one of the best adaptations, mostly just because of how much time and effort they put into those movies. Although, I do wonder what Tolkien would think of the movies. But eh, Tolkien wasn't writing for anyone but himself, and for him there was a lot more in the myth construction and evolution of the world around specific elements than actually making it a good, engaging story.

[rogueslayer452.livejournal.com]

I remember seeing them in the school library and there were missing chunks between volumes.

The LOTR/Hobbit movies are probably one of the best adaptations, mostly just because of how much time and effort they put into those movies.

ITA. It's amazing seeing all the hard work PJ and Co. placed in making these films and making sure that Middle-earth was recreated. Watching all the behind the scenes stuff alone from both trilogies makes you realize that it's no simple task. Yeah, people will hem and haw about what wasn't done, but the amount of care placed into the work is quite noticeable, from the costumes to the sets. Never mind that filming in New Zealand is possibly the best location to bring that world to life.