After watching the Reacher miniseries on Amazon Prime Video, I began thinking about how beloved books and book series are adapted to film. From Lee Child’s action-packed Jack Reacher book series to fantasy epics like J.R.R. Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings, audiences debate whether the book or the movie (or show) adaptation is better.

Many people enjoy comparing the book and film adaptations of a work while others get frustrated that a particular adaptation strayed from the source material. Perhaps a character like Jack Reacher looks different in our heads than he does on screen, or the Hobbits never encounter the ancient undead barrow-wights in the film like they do near the beginning of the first book. Are these differences enough to discount an adaptation as inferior to the source material or completely change how the source material is read and enjoyed?

Of course, the answer to this question is up to the individual to decide. Personally, I appreciate each medium as its own creative expression. Books allow readers to transport themselves inside of the story and interpret the characters and events in unique ways whereas film can be a take-it-or-leave-it proposition. While books rely on the reader’s imagination to bring characters and events to life, film adaptations can provide a new interpretation of a work that is fresh and interesting. Books have more freedom to explore many plot threads while the same approach in movies and shows can introduce pacing problems.

The specific ways books and films engage readers and viewers cannot be entirely replicated by one medium or the other; however, these differences are their strengths. Does that mean we should avoid debates about which version of a story is better? Not at all. Comparing and contrasting film adaptations from the source material (or vice versa) makes for a fun discussion and can introduce new books that people would not have known about if a film adaptation was not made.

Cover ArtThe Lord of the Rings by J. R. R. Tolkien
ISBN: 9780618640157
Publication Date: 2005-10-12