"The book is always better than the movie," says Vinny.
"Wow!" I say, trying to wrap my head around the words coming out of the 8-year-old's mouth.
"I saw 'Harry Potter and the Goblett of Fire,' and the characters weren't as good as the ones in my head, when I read the book," says Vinny.
Maybe there are some exceptions to his statement, but I can't think of any, can you?
But if the book is just so-so, I'd rather watch the movie, than read the book. A so-so book will take forever and ever to read, whereas the movie will be over in two hours or less.
Take the case of "Twilight," the Movie, I watched it last summer, in one night! Amazing, I know.
Now "Twilight" the book, well, let's just say I've been stuck on page 220 for two weeks. Maybe I shouldn't have watched the movie, first.
And now I'm stuck with all their lame visuals, except Eduard, he's a very good visual. Vampires are so hot.
Don't even get me started on the HBO series True Blood, which I believe is based on a series of books. OMG! talk about scorching, hot vampires!
If the books are anything like the series, then there has got to be a lot more sex scenes than Twilight, which at zero, so far, won't be hard to beat...............
2 comments:
Nana feels like her grandson. Images from a book are always hard to beat. I have always scanned movie credits to see if it was based on a book. Too many unanswered question in the movie. Read the book for answers.
All this vampire craze. Remember the old TV show "Dark Shadows"? Recently canceled "Moonlight" had one sexy vampire, Mick St.John. He could bite my neck any day!
Yeah he's a lot like you. The first thing he did when we got into our condo was make ice! Not sure if he's into vampires though.
Post a Comment