oh my goodness, books of course, no doubt!

the movies have too much to live up to, they just don't seem to be able to satify as many people as they should.

on one hand, there's the HP fans out there who want to see it perfect, which (sad to admit, *sob sob*) is impossible to do; and then there's the media and everyone else who isn't such a fan, or haven't read the book. they want the movie to appeal to them, by not making it too complex, and playing up the bits that are more exciting on screen, rather than the actual plot, vital to the story!

i know this is about PS and CoS, but it applies to all the movies. the story was intended to be read, JK wrote it as a book, and the films simply take away the need to read, and mess up the story. granted, it's not so bad in the first movies, but i still remember being outraged at the ommission of both peeves and the last "trap" before the PS is found, with snapes logic puzzle, to name a few.

it's just not the same, just not canon!

im gonna go with the books being better because even though you dont get the visuals on what the book say in front of you on a television you dont have to lose anything from the book..i mean compared to a movie where they cut all sorts of things that people may have loved in the books as long as you have a vivid imagination you can pretty much play the movie in your head without losing anything..

the books are WAY better cause they have more details. it would be nice for once if a director of a HP movie would include ALL the details.

The books are so much better than the movies. It takes money and food to make a movie but it takes a lot of talent to write. it takes a lot of patience and hard work to create the characters for the book.

Contributing to what everyone has said, maybe even repeating, I find that the books are much more enjoyable for me. Everyone is entitled to their own preferences, of course.

If you think about it, the books are the reason that the movies are so famous, and I'm pretty sure most of us on this site joined because we are fans of the books more than we are of the movies. The books are amazing and the HP experience you get from the books is one that far exceeds the experience you get out of watching the movies. There are always going to be things that the movies leave out, and I find that the reason I watch the movies is just to get a little extra out of the whole HP experience.

The books are Jo's own creation, and you get the real deal out of them. Of course, I may just be biased because I prefer reading a book than to actually watching the film made after it.

I like the Movies but i think they dont really follow them well. they cut out all lmy favourite parts. I love the book though

[FONT=Times][B]THE BOOKS ARE DEFINITELY BETTER BECAUSE THE READER CAN IMAGINE EVERYTHING THATS GOING ON BUT IN THE MOVIES YOU DONT GET A CHANCE TO USE YOUR IMAGINATION.

So good as a movie could be, I believe that it will never be so good as a book. Maybe an image is better than a thousand words, but when the movies are based on books so they can be only an adaptation.
The movies can be awesome, nevertheless they´re never going to have the discursive cuality of the book they came from. Not only because the "time fact" makes them leave some things aside, but because good books are made to evolve in your head. In other words as you advance through the reading you develop richer mental images.

Reading what I just write It´s sounds like I doesn´t enjoy the movies, which is completely false. I just believes that in this cases is a lot more enjoyable that the visual proposal come first from the individual imagination.

Yep, I agree Bendis. I get the feeling that they try to add lots of stuff to the movies to give them some sort of message, because the plot itself doesn't do that on its own. Like the eternal glory thing in GoF to make the tournament huge. What? We only just hear about the tournament after four years at Hogwarts, and Harry definitely doesn't have eternal glory after winning it - on the contrary...

And that whole scene in PoA where Lupin tells Harry about his parents. Although the whole 'Lily believed in him' thing is sweet and all, it just shows that you really have to spell things out in a movie that can usually be done much more subtly in books. I prefer the subtle way, because it doesn't over-emphasise the message, getting preachy.

The whole Lily thing felt a bit pretentious too, especially when the marauders, the thing in the books that really made Harry connect with his dad (and the reason for his patronus!), were unceremoniously cut because they didn't have time for them.

*sigh* Ok well, all in all the movies aren't bad as such, just a tad frustrating on bad days. PS is still a very cute film to watch, though...

Yeah, they do add a lot to the movies, but they really take out alot. I enjoyed 4, but I was really surprised at how much was missing. The books are so good, it is hard to contain it within a movie. What will they do for 5, it is even longer. The movies will never come close.

I prefare the books for the detail and imagination of which it puts into your head. I like the movies but i feel happier reading the books

I think the books and the movies balance each other out. Yes granted I have been a bit dissapointed when they take out scenes I was sure was going to be there, but they have to do that, it would cost way to much money to make a movie to fit everything in about a book as long as the 5th book. However I would have loved it!

When you read the books you imagine what is going on with your own ideas, as to how they move, say things, and their facial expressions, and you get more detail as to what is going on in Harry's head.

When you watch the movies, you dont have to imangine the scene becasue its already there in front of you, and you can pay close attention to the detail, like if you missed something when reading the book, or when your watching, and some conntection happens and you go
"OH!"

But thats my opinion

Sam

GREDandFEORGE, I fully agree with you. To be honest, the question is not correct. It would be better to discuss on the topic "Which do you prefer?", not "Which is better".

We can't decide what is better, cause these are Different threads of art. They are fairly different emotionally, their influence is different. That is why the movies shouldn't follow the books page by page.

As for me, I prefer watching movies to reading books. But, of course, not always!

obviously the books! The movies leave out WAY TOO MUCH! There weren't even any house elves in HP4 movie, and Dobby played a HUGE part in the book!

No competition...the books are better because the movies leave out too much...well the 3rd and 4th movies, because I thought the first two satisfactoringly accurate.

course book is better book is more interesting and if they can not show us all movies about hp7

I have a feeling that I've posted here before...or not. Anyway the is no contest. Books are nearly always better than the movies, so much more can be said, things can be described better and I don't know about anyone else but I am always left disappointed by someone elses vision of a scene or a character...well except the Hp actors who are pretty close to how I imagined them. The films are excellent, don't get me wrong, but the books have them beat hands down.

the books ar better, of course. they give more detail of the characters and environments. the movies are excellent and i haven't been displeased with any of them. they actually show you the visuals that you always wanted to see. goblet of fire rocks!

Don't get me wrong I love the movies but they can't convey the deepness of the story, how Harry, Ron and Hermy are feeling. It can't convey how important it is for Harry to kill Voldemort. With the books you can read in between the lines to understand the full meaning. With movies you can't really convey the message of why h is is all happening and what it all means. SO for me personnley with any book to movie switch the book is always better for me. But I do really enjoy the movies because i know the full storie too.

The books are much better which off course dosnt mean i hated the movies.
The books just has a more 4 dimensional persperctive on things somehow.
And i dont feel that it seems that much in the movies like Snape favorices Slytherin he just seems like a terrible man although i think his playd well.
But i think books will almost always be better than movies no matter the cuality.

I agree with the lot of you. I prefer the books, because they convey so much more emotion than the best actor or actress out there. Also, there's something about reading a book that makes you more attached to the characters -- not just the lead, but even the villains. It's like knowing them on a personal level because you're somehow privy to their thoughts.

The movies are okay, but I tried placing myself in the position of those who have not yet read the book, and I realized that if I were them, I would be missing out on so much. Take GoF for example. I cried a little bit when Cedric died in the books, but in the movie I felt nothing. *shrugs*

Lastly, books are better because I like prolonging the experience. Movies are over in 2, 3 hours tops, but books can last more than 10 hours depending on the length. Haha

I much prefer the books, in fact I think it was a mistake to make the movies. I can't even remember how I used to imagine everything before the films came out, which is dissapointing for me. Also, I don't think the kids playing the main characters are very good...the over acting, especially in the first one was rediculous. Hermione especially, with lines like the "or worse...expelled" one. They also look bad because they are having to act next to the best actors we have.

I think my other problem with the films is that it all seems so fake, you see the steps and you think, this is a movie, whereas with the books you can really be there. It was like Lord of the Rings...amazing films! Because they seemed so real. I mean how many schools have you seen with no litter anywhere, kids walking calmly to lessons chatting away etc. The reason I loved the books in the first place was because they were so real.

Books. I generally don't like when books get turned into movies, it rarely works. It's just impossible to translate all the emotions and details from page to screen. Something will always be left out and the movie would somehow seem incomplete. As for HP movies specifically.. For those who did read HP, the movies are very predictable and therefore not as interesting because they know exactly what is going to happen (IMHO). For those who didn't read the books, the movies can be really confusing, because of all the things left out. So it's a lose-lose situation. Even the best directors and the best actors can hardly make it otherwise.

P.S. I don't think the HP movies are bad at all. Well, the first two might have been a little too much by-the-book, but PoA and GoF.. pretty good, the acting and special effects and all. But still..

I agree with you bluezz: if you read the book you know what is going to happen, but if you don't read the book there is a bit of confusion.
Anyway, I think that when they turn books into movies (not only for HP books) you can see just the plot of the book, but it is defenitelly a different thing.
However, when I read a book I'm always curious how they will turn a situation (for example scenes with dragons in the GoF and, in effect they were different ).

However I think that a book is always better, there are more descriptions, more details and more feelings and emotions that a movie can't show.

The book is more complex .... has a lot of details ... the movies are for the ones who don`t like to read .

P.S: sorry for my language ... but I`m not a english man .

I prefer the book than the movies but I can say that the GOF is the best movie right now.
On the book you can read all the sucess and the story that JK wrote and of course is better that.
I think the same as you Zil, the movie are to ones who don't like read.

I like them equal. I like JK's writing and her passion of her work. But the movies are cool because Harry and the others fit there characters so well. They dont realise how good of a job they did because when I read Harry Potter books I can picture them doing this and there voices. Also I like the movies because I can see pretty, pretty Hermione!

I would have to say that the books are better, because as many of you have said, JK Rowling can put in lots of detail that can't be put into a movie. Though, Usually I really dislike movies that are made from books, but I think HP movies are great!!

-ilovehedwig-

It's obvious that book is usually better that the movie and in HP series case the situation's the same. There are so many interesting situations, details, characters in book, that aren't included in the movie, which is a great pity. Personally, I was a bit upset about the fact that in the PoA there wasn't a scene where Harry wins a Quidditch Cup for Gryffindor, using his brand-new Firebolt (there wasn't even Wood in the Movie 3 ). Some scenes of any HP movie are also a bit different than it was in a book. Sometimes it's the change for the better and sometimes for worse. So all in all, books rule!! That's my opinion.

I nearly fell in love Harry Potter and all his adventures when I was in 4th grade and reading was just getting to be really fun. I've always liked reading--it was sort of an escape from the hassles of everyday life. While reading I could go off on these adventures in the books, in my imagination. I thought up the characters--what they looked like, acted like, sounded like. I imagined the places, and it was all just for me. Harry Potter was one of those books that if you bothered me while reading it, I wouldnt listen to you until I was done with that chapter or that page....I'd ignore you or simply holler at you for pulling me away from the book.
I always hated it when movies came out, only after the book was written. It made me think about all the directors ruining kid's imaginations. Thats exactly what books were to do, and they go and give these people and places concrete faces, and locations, and its all thier doing, and kids or anybody who read the book, and then goes to see the movie is disappointed whether they hide it well or not. That always kind of bugged me. It did with Harry Potter at first too. I was like, 11 when the movie came out, and I must admit, when I saw the trailor and Harry had blue eyes and not green I was mildly upset. (I was 11) It was such a big deal in the book, why not give the kid contacts? Hermione was nothing like I thought she would be..But Ron surprised me. Rupert Grint looked exactly how I wanted Ron to look. Dumbledore too..But I do believe I'm getting off the point here.
Books are always better than the movies, because your imagination is way more entertaining than some idea the director had as he cuts out some of the best parts. Your imagination wouldnt do that to you.
Dont get me wrong, the movies are breathtaking, but books are love. End of story.

I think that the books are way better than the movies.In the HP movies they take out half the book because the books are to long.The books have alot more info.in them i like the books way better than the movies.

Well just to let everyone know i love both the Movies and the Books, but if i had to pick one of them between the two of them it would be the books because well it has more to them and plus you are reading and in the movies they are Cutting things out andmainly the best parts are wrong but i love the moves i like looking at the actors and thigns of that but the books are the best JK rowling is so awesome at what she does for a living it is amzing the way she writes

The movies are really good because they show parts that you may not have fullly understood or couldn't imagine happening when you read the books, such as the way somebody says something (shocked, angry, etc.). But, with the movies they often cut the parts that people find most interesting in the books because they aren't really relevant to the plot. Also, with the books, after you have read them a certain number of times it starts to get boring after a while whereas with the movie it is quite fun to watch it over and over again to see the parts that made us laugh again.

Books are MUCH better than the movies. The books for anything are always better than the movies. Movies just can't be long enough to fit all the the important things in them. Sadly.

I really like the books, but i also really like the movies! I think that they are doing a pretty good job with the movies consitering the fact that there are about 400 pages in each book (on average...) that they have to cram into a 2 hour film. But, since the books have more detail, i like them better!

Of course that the books are better than the movies...even if I want to be a filmmaker... because the books has more things that the movies much of the can put on them... don't you think so?

Totally the books. The movies have restrictions books don't. The books can go into more detail and express things more fully. Sadly, the movies can't do that. They have to try and put it all into 2 hours! I wish the movies could put everthing into them, but I know they can't. I can dream because it would be really awesome to see everything played out. Oh well.

Books are the best but the movies are good too in there own way in the forth movie they added a lot of funny parts

Yah, the books are definatly better than the movies. Just like hilly said, they go into more details and give insight on the characters like how Harry is felling and what he is thinking. Also movies have to skip parts and sometimes change things so that it appears better on film which doesn't make it as good. But I love the movies. Especially the actors

Movies 3 and up were very good. Numbers 1 and 2 were okay, but not the best they could've done.
All in all, though, the books are definatly better than the movies. Without a doubt.

It's hard to make a movie that lives up to it's book form. I have yet to find on that has. The books are most definitely better, mostly because they have a lot more detail and the characters I find are more developed. I don't think the movies could be that much better then they are, but hands-down the books are more enjoyable.

Well, I like both. I love watching the movies, I loove the actors... But I prefer the books. I find them more complete, more exciting.
So... That's all.

I love the books, the actors, the movies, the intense theme, the stupid!! waiting. I love it all, its part of a series and I love it, I just wish it wouldnt end!

The movies were pretty good but i love the books more of course.

Without thinking, the books. I admire and respect all the hard work and dedication that it took to make these movies, but no matter how hard you try, the books will win. They allow you to see things how YOU want to see them and that is irreplacable.

Wow I can't believe there was a forum for this. What do I think? I books are definitely better! The only movie I would say was decent was Prizoner of Azkaban, the other ones are just....meh

I love seeing the movies....but it has to be books for me...theres just so much more detail and it always flows whereas when you watch movies it can be choppy if they have cut out too many scenes etc or they change the director every film ...so yea the books do it for me!

Oh, yes. The books are much better than the movies. It seems that the movies are always leaving out minor details....

The books offer much more detail and minor parts that the movies just cannot show because of time constraints. I like the books because they are longer and have more detail, but the movies I enjoy becaue I can see the actors playing their parts and see the great special effects that are used, so I would have to say that they are both equally good, I love both the boks and movies, but for diff reasons

I think that the books are far better than the movies. See, the movies are good if you compared them to other movies. Like, if the movies were not based off a book I would probably be obsessed with them. But seeing that they are based off a book, it is a kind of tradition for me to go see them but criticize them for everything that is against what happened in the book. So I think that the books represent more than in the movie because you can actually tell what the characters are thinking and things just make more sense. I bet that if I watched the movies without reading the books then I wouldn't understand anything.