SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion

60 views
Members' Chat > Has film/TV messed with my reading taste?

Comments Showing 1-23 of 23 (23 new)    post a comment »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Tony (new)

Tony Mohorovich (tonymohorovich) | 14 comments I find I respond better to fiction that could easily be translated into film/TV.

That is, "scene focused" fiction that plants me in a specific moment in the story as seen through a character's eyes, rather than more discursive narration that moves about the world and various subjects like a disembodied sentient.

My attention tends to wander when reading discursive prose.

This makes it more challenging to appreciate less "visual" stories.

Anyone else find this?


message 2: by Cheryl (new)

Cheryl (cherylllr) I find the opposite. If something is too filmable, I get annoyed. I want to read the stories that are a best fit for the printed page, that can't be effectively translated to visual. I like language, not just word-play or 'purple prose' but just grace & style & all the things I can't do especially right now....


message 3: by CBRetriever (new)

CBRetriever | 6225 comments inner monologue does not translate well to the screen and I like that in books


message 4: by Allison, Fairy Mod-mother (new)

Allison Hurd | 14249 comments Mod
the only real difference I've found in my reading is that I can now listen to audiobooks as well as read them with my eyes, personally!


message 5: by E.D. (last edited Oct 27, 2020 06:47PM) (new)

E.D. Robson | 262 comments I find that I do get uncomfortable if I feel that something has been written with half (or more) of an eye for the screen play. Having said that I have no problem with subsequent transferals of literature to the screen and in some cases have actually preferred the screen version.

I do wonder if the need for fast changing scenes and action are a mainly a difference in generational tastes given the advances of technology.

On the audio book front I have not experimented with it yet. I have listened to a couple of radio plays for the first time in the last year (curtesy of the BBC in the UK) and found it a reasonable experience. I have also noted that a number of goodreads contributors seem to prefer it so I will give audio a try soon (once I've sold my house and moved).


message 6: by Tomas (new)

Tomas Grizzly | 448 comments I've actually stopped watching movies, apart from documentaries on the TV. The last time I went to the cinema is like 5 years ago.


message 7: by Hans (new)

Hans | 189 comments Allison wrote: "the only real difference I've found in my reading is that I can now listen to audiobooks as well as read them with my eyes, personally!"

I'm like that, too. Often, I even prefer audiobooks nowadays. But I think that's rather because there are some really fantastic voice actors out there that can add that special something to a narrative. Anything that has a lot of dialect and accents in it for example.

With TV, I think it's the other way around. I guess my reading has messed with my watching tastes. More often than not I find myself drawn to shows that are less action based and more complex and introspective.


message 8: by Gabi (new)

Gabi | 3441 comments For me, I guess, it's like TV series turned me to books in a hard way. The TV series I did bother to follow to the end during the last 10 years I can count on my fingers, and I wouldn't need both hands. Somehow nothing can hold my interest.

Yet my reading count went up astronomically.

That said, I would certainly have a look at TV adaptations of books I've loved, should they occur.


message 9: by Tony (new)

Tony Mohorovich (tonymohorovich) | 14 comments Allison wrote: "the only real difference I've found in my reading is that I can now listen to audiobooks as well as read them with my eyes, personally!"

I tried audiobooks at bedtime and I kept dozing off. Methinks I should give them another go during the day, on a walk, following some caffeine.


message 10: by Tony (new)

Tony Mohorovich (tonymohorovich) | 14 comments CBRetriever wrote: "inner monologue does not translate well to the screen and I like that in books"

True. That's probably the greatest boon of fiction; inner monologue adds another dimension to character. It's more challenging to explore this dimension in film/TV without dialogue (and great acting and directing).


message 11: by Tony (new)

Tony Mohorovich (tonymohorovich) | 14 comments Cheryl wrote: "I find the opposite. If something is too filmable, I get annoyed. I want to read the stories that are a best fit for the printed page, that can't be effectively translated to visual. I like languag..."

I'd like to develop a palate for this sort of fiction. I hope you don't mind me following you on Goodreads to spy on your recommendations...


message 12: by Tony (new)

Tony Mohorovich (tonymohorovich) | 14 comments I'm like that, too. Often, I even prefer au..."

Any SciFi audiobooks you would recommend (with great voice actors)?


message 13: by Tony (new)

Tony Mohorovich (tonymohorovich) | 14 comments E.D. wrote: "I find that I do get uncomfortable if I feel that something has been written with half (or more) of an eye for the screen play. Having said that I have no problem with subsequent transferals of lit..."

Yes, the fast-changing scenes could also be generational. My kids' favourite shows and movies generally have a quicker pace than my childhood favourites (we watched Willow as a family the other day). If this continues, I wonder what the pace of media will be like in two generations...


message 14: by Tony (new)

Tony Mohorovich (tonymohorovich) | 14 comments Gabi wrote: "For me, I guess, it's like TV series turned me to books in a hard way. The TV series I did bother to follow to the end during the last 10 years I can count on my fingers, and I wouldn't need both h..."

Sometimes a character's arc feels a bit too rushed in a two hour film. I do generally prefer TV series to film these days. There is more time/space to explore characters, watch them grow (or the opposite). The beauty of fiction is that it gives characters even more room to breathe.


message 15: by Anna (new)

Anna (vegfic) | 10457 comments Tony wrote: "Any SciFi audiobooks you would recommend (with great voice actors)?"

Check out the Best and Worst Audiobooks and Narrators thread for tips!


message 16: by Leonie (new)

Leonie (leonierogers) | 1229 comments Tony wrote: "I'm like that, too. Often, I even prefer au..."

Any SciFi audiobooks you would recommend (with great voice actors)?"


The Illuminae by Amie Kaufman and Amie Kaufman are excellently narrated, by a whole cast.


message 17: by DivaDiane (new)

DivaDiane SM | 3701 comments I have a deep abiding love for character based fiction and love the slow pace and lyrical prose of authors like Le Guin, Robin Hobb, Hermann Hesse, Toni Morrison. And that’s probably why I like speculative poetry.

That said, I found I am not immune to the effects of writing like Blake Crouch’s in Dark Matter, which I read last year. That is definitely cinematic prose. It was nice as a palate cleanser and was good to really get enthralled and immersed and glued to the book. But I couldn’t read only that.

I love audio books for when I’m doing mundane tasks or walking to and fro (as a form of transportation rather than for the walk in and of itself). But, it can’t be anything that requires much concentration. If I miss something and have to go back or just be confused, then it sort of missing the point. I manage to read an additional book or two each month due to audio books.


message 18: by Tony (new)

Tony Mohorovich (tonymohorovich) | 14 comments Diane wrote: "I have a deep abiding love for character based fiction and love the slow pace and lyrical prose of authors like Le Guin, Robin Hobb, Hermann Hesse, Toni Morrison. And that’s probably why I like spe..."

I love the term "cinematic prose". Some cinematic novels read more like a script, making them a fast-paced fun read.

Having said that, I do find slower paced books more memorable, e.g. Le Guin's The Left Hand of Darkness.

Once I was about a chapter into a popular cinematic novel, only to realise that I had already read it months earlier, and for the life of me I couldn't recall the plot and had to resort to Wikipedia to remind me. It's like the characters and story didn't 'stick' for some reason.


message 19: by DivaDiane (new)

DivaDiane SM | 3701 comments I think that might be because they are meant to be consumed and not mulled over or life changing/mind-blowing.


message 20: by Wyatt (new)

Wyatt | 6 comments I find that it’ll mess with me only if I’m looking for something entertaining in the way it is filmed (written) like Goodfellas.

Books are a completely different medium.


message 21: by CBRetriever (new)

CBRetriever | 6225 comments one book that was completely different in the film version was The Color Purple. I liked both versions


message 22: by Cheryl (new)

Cheryl (cherylllr) CBRetriever wrote: "inner monologue does not translate well to the screen and I like that in books"

Yes.

Hans wrote: "Often, I even prefer audiobooks nowadays. But I think that's rather because there are some really fantastic voice actors out there that can add that special something to a narrative. Anything that has a lot of dialect and accents in it for example."

The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn as narrated by Patrick Fraley is a prime example.

Hans also wrote: "With TV, I think it's the other way around. I guess my reading has messed with my watching tastes. More often than not I find myself drawn to shows that are less action based and more complex and introspective."

Indeed. The more I read, the less enamored of the screen I am. Especially of chase and battle scenes... get to the point already so we have time for character development and plot nuances.


message 23: by Christopher (new)

Christopher | 981 comments One thing that screen can do to my reading is mess with my imagined look for everything described in the novel.


back to top