Why do some people prefer watching movies than reading novels even if they are both based on the same source material (book)?
Last Updated: 22.06.2025 09:37
Imagery, sequence, suspense, emotions. Some authors may not be able to bring the story out the way a movie director could.
Many people do not have a comprehensive vocabulary in any language required to sail through a literary work in it, leave alone the one which their material of interest is printed in. Not all of us will patiently read with a dictionary by our sides.
PC: Google (Romeo and Juliet)
Which sunscreen shall we use to apply on oily skin?
So what you see on screen is fun, visually entertaining, well put-together as opposed to a novel that may have been tiring, boring and not well placed.
Many people just survive school and college just preparing their study material and do not have enough aptitude in any language to be able to read and comprehensively understand long texts.
Have the ability to visualize:
Is CPA affiliate marketing real or a scam?
A movie may have taken some creative license and given us a more feel good ending that is more appealing to audiences than the original book storyline.
PC: Google
Sometimes the production team of the movie is just better than the author of the novel, correspondingly:
Granted that the examples I might be citing here are as such not great works, but bear with me.
Outdated language but easily understandable presentation in cinema:
The books, however, were insufferable. They were filled with “holy shit” and other moronic mind voices of the protagonist Anna. They effectively drowned out the story and I quit midway of 50 shades darker
Many if not most, are in this category.
Let's be frank. What is in fiction for us unless we are forced to study it at school?
A story is just a sequence of events but storytelling involves a lot more. With words alone, it's already a handicap, but even there, not all authors are created the same.
What do men like to be given for their birthday?
Or the movie script may have taken the source material and derived its own form of storytelling, which may prove to be more interesting than the novel’s storytelling style.
Twilight at least was somewhat decently written. The Grey series was not even good writing.
How many of you found the Twilight franchise and 50 shades of Grey trilogy at least somewhat entertaining as movies? I did!
Sometimes, maybe you aren't good at English so you find it hard to read an English book, say, Game of Thrones, in its original format. So you buy a translated version in your mother tongue, say Tamil or Hindi (hypothetically).
PC: Google…my precious!
Actually have some literary skill:
Even if one has the skill, many people lack the ability to imagine and visualize the scenes portrayed in words, which dampens their novel experience. It's just a bunch of words to them.
But take one of his plays and make me a movie and I'd love to watch. I loved “A Midsummer Night’s Dream”as a movie more than the play all because of the writing style. I am used to reading proper prose in novels. Not the script of plays. So the movie worked better for me.
There is also the issue of translation and language barrier.
Where can I find BPO projects?
But no one will have any problem in watching a dubbed version of GoT and all the titillating scenes in it are further incentive to brave through it effortlessly. No skill required.
This is often a mindset. It can be acquired and often comes naturally to those who have a reading habit as such, but there are a number of people who do try and are unable to carry this conversion out effectively - maybe something to do with the creative/imaginative centres of the brain.
Some translated books are just not good. Ponniyin Selvan is an example.
How did it feel when experiencing gay sex for the first?
Netflix and chill is a thing:
PC: Google
Twilight was a fun watch - I suspended my brain and enjoyed the imaginary world.
Blink and your AI security playbook is out of date - Axios
If you have to work too hard to get entertained, it may not appeal to you. And for some people, reading is too hard a work and watching a movie is simply easier.
Because reading is WORK. Period.
Bella in the movies remained the eff shut up, so I could just use both my own imagination and enjoy the director’s vision.
PC: Google
Entertainment.
Reading a novel, especially a fictional novel with immense imagery, and enjoying it on par with or more than you'd enjoy a movie requires you to:
Her orgasmic thoughts were thankfully absent in the movie so the movie was way better. Still bad enough that I just watched the first and passed the rest.
Very hard to do the above very enjoyable couple/group/friends activity with books.
PC: Google
Turns out, the translation is not the slang you speak in real life but is a formal proper language and you suck at that as well.
The Grey series was steamy but I was still able to focus on the actual story in the movies.
There is an actual condition - aphantasia- wherein you lack the ability to imagine/visualise.
You'll not work to get something you can get by just paying for a Netflix subscription.
The novels? I picked up Eclipse, and a few sentences showing the various ruminations of Bella were enough to make me hate her already. I didn't attempt to read.
In the end, if nothing else, a movie is just a touch and earphones away. A book requires concentration. The lazier option is always more appealing.
Unless you have a reading habit as such, you cannot read fast and comprehensively enough to not just process the words and sentences, but also to feel the phrase, sentence, paragraph, page or chapter as a whole.
PC: The Guardian
I don't have the patience to read Shakespeare and visualize the story because of the old lyrical English therein. Not much for poetic/dramatic words.
So a novel may be less enjoyable for them.
I didn't like the English translated version at all and I am not that good at literary Tamil to read the original.
There are some books that just…suck!
I gave up and enjoyed the movies, read the discussions on the original text and enjoyed it immensely.