Books or movies? This has been a significant question in the media ever since the popularity of movie adaptations of books has risen these past couple of decades. Adaptations of book series such as “Harry Potter” and “Percy Jackson” have opened up discussions and arguments as to whether the books or movies were better. While movies drive a hard bargain with their strengths in convenience and understandability, books can easily counter these attributes with their detail and opportunities for creativity. So what am I getting at here? As unpopular and completely biased as this statement seems to be, I believe books are better than movies.

With the popularity of adapting books to film seeming to soar in recent decades, it’s hard to imagine a popular book not getting a movie (or television show) version nowadays. But book-to-movie adaptations have been around for a lot longer than what one might expect. The first movie adaptation to be made was the 1899 film “Cinderella” directed by Georges Méliès. While not the famous Disney version, it was adapted from the original text and eventually ended up becoming the starting point to a growing trend in media.

So what’s the appeal to these movies? It’s quite simple: movies are able to be more stimulating in a shorter amount of time. It’s a valid argument – some people simply don’t have the time or energy to read. Plus, it’s not as if movie adaptations are bad either. Movies such as “Enola Holmes” and “Wonder” have been rated highly and are loved by the media.

If we want to go a step further, comic book adaptations are widely popular as well. Especially when it comes to Marvel and DC movies, they were able to create some of the largest fan bases globally while taking inspiration from their comics. Even though these movies aren’t typically exact adaptations, they’re still creating the opportunity for more audiences to experience these universes and characters along with comic book readers.

While movies have their advantages, I believe when compared to books these can be their disadvantages as well. Anyone who reads regularly has noticed that books take hours to read. Some may see this as an inconvenience, but honestly it’s the aspect that makes a reader feel more connected with the plot. With more time spent getting to know the characters, setting, and situations, it typically causes people to feel more connected and reeled in to the story. Movies are able to achieve this, but definitely not to the extent that books can.

Another point at which books excel is that they are more detailed and allow for more creativity that movies are simply unable to provide. Sure, anyone could analyze the frames of a movie to pick up more detail, but for the average viewer they just won’t do that. Reading provides people with more details clearly while also allowing them to create their own. How do the characters look? How do they walk? How modern or traditional does a building look? The reader typically gets to decide these sorts of things and in my opinion, this makes reading even more enjoyable. Books allow flexibility where movies can’t.

Movie adaptations are, in a way, summarized books. While not necessarily being a bad thing, it can take away from viewers’ ability to use their own creativity and build a stronger connection with a piece of media. With all that being said, I believe that books are the way to go.