You know what I find funny? Not funny ha-ha...funny ironic. It's the fact that although I always like the book better than the movie, I tend to like the movie better if I've watched it before I've read the book. I guess that comes from the fact that if I've read the book and developed the characters in my mind and had a good laugh or a good cry, I've already attached myself to the story the way I imagined it. I find myself completely and totally irrational about the way a screenwriter or filmmaker changed something or cast the wrong (in my mind) actor/actress. HOWEVER, if I watch the movie adaptation first and really enjoy it...laugh with it...cry with it...and then I go back and read the book for the first time, I'm able to look at it objectively and see where the screenwriter was coming from. Maybe I won't fully agree with the adaptations or the casting choices, but for some odd reason, I'm able to go-with-it...to accept it. I'll pretty always still like the book better, but I won't hate the movie in that case. I'm a strange one, I suppose. Or are there other people who feel the same?
So often times, if I haven't yet read a book and I see a movie based on a book coming to theaters, I'll wait to read the book until after I've gone to see the movie. I know myself. I'm saving myself from inevitable disappointment. I can only think of one exception to the
(my) rule
(that the book is ALWAYS better than the movie), and that would be
The Notebook. I thought the movie blew the book away. Maybe it's just
Ryan Gosling. Maybe it was the undeniable chemistry between Gosling and
McAdams. I don't know. It just "is".
