Holes question

The movie did bring light to the book, just like the Jurassic Park movie did for Michael Crichton's book as well, for me at least. Very few books have been so successfully adapted to become equally celebrated movies. But as an adult, the movie wins by a whisker.

I love the movie, the book is obviously the original so has more to it, but the movie does a really good job and the acting is amazing. I love seeing the story brought to life and the way they are able to tell the past and present stories at the same time with good transitions.

I liked the book, but when I watched the movie, i thought it was better. I am more of a visual person, and descriptions help me, but it is much easier to imagine when I just see it.

i read the book when i was really young and have tried rereading it. it is very engaging, but the movie is soooo well-made!!

ImScared3222 wrote: "I watched the movie so many times as a kid before I ever read the book. I think I like them both equally. They are both different experiences for me. The movie is nostalgic and fun. The book is fun..."

Same here. The movie was fun and it had those actors we knew from the shows we watched (and then some of those actors from older movies we wished we'd been able to see when they'd come out). I read the book later as well. I felt it had more depth, but was still as enjoyable as the movie, just in a different way.

The book! The book goes SO much more in depth.

I feel like this is the peanut butter & jelly of questions:
You need both to make the perfect sandwich.
There is so much to love about both the film and the book, they both enhance each other so well!

I like both equally because I had read the book before watching the movie, and then watching the movie made me go "wow this is the perfect combo of a movie based off of a book"

I thought the book was so much better than the movie. I'm not sure I would've understood the movie without reading the book.