argument top image

Should books be adapted into movies? Show more Show less
Back to question

We’ve seen many of our favourite stories rise to the silver screen. From childhood favourites like Harry Potter to remakes of classics like Little Women, many books have been adapted into screenplays and made into movies. The big dilemma: read the book, or watch the movie? Should the movie adaptation even exist at all?

Books should not be adapted into movies Show more Show less

Movies cannot live up to the books they are based on, and can even ruin them.
< (2 of 3) Next position >

Movies cannot fully represent the book

Certain parts of the book are inevitably left out to accommodate movie production. There is no “perfect” adaptation.
< (2 of 4) Next argument >

The Argument

Movies often have to omit elements of a book so that it can fit the production; be it plot, characters or other small details. This could affect the story’s overall direction, and confuse those who have read the book first. Movies cannot ensure the full representation of a book's contents. For example, “It” had to be divided into two parts to fully encapsulate the story Stephen King wrote. They were released two years apart, one in 2017 and one in 2019. Compared to the book, which is sold as one volume, there exists a disconnection in the story that the film tells.

Counter arguments


[P1] Technical considerations limit the film's representation of the book. [P2] Movies are not good representations of the books they are based on.

Rejecting the premises



    Not sure yet? Read more ↑


    This page was last edited on Tuesday, 7 Apr 2020 at 12:18 UTC

    Explore related arguments