The Selling Point

As some of you may have guessed, I have been on a Harry Potter reading spree lately. Well, naturally after reading all of the seven books, I decided to move on to watching the movies. I'd seen bits and pieces of 1-4 before, but they were disappointing. These past few days, however, I forced myself to sit down and watch all of them.

I was still disappointed. 

The movie critic in me will admit that the movies have gotten progressively better, but they're still lackluster compared to the books. And that's my problem: I can't separate the books from the movies. Which means instead of enjoying the special effects or the quality of acting, I'm muttering about how this and that is missing.

Which brings me to the point: Movies and books have different selling points. 

For example: If I wrote a book based completely on the Harry Potter movie (let's say the Goblet of Fire), I would have a pretty pathetic book. There is no Winky, no hints of dark things to come, and everything would seem to happen by luck rather than any sort of premeditation or foreshadowing. The reader would miss out on that "Ah-ha!" moment that I absolutely reveled in while reading. I would never sell the movie-book, that's for sure.

Which makes me wonder how low we've stooped to find something so one-dimensional entertaining. And that's what the movies are: one-dimensional. 

I will admit it's impossible to incorporate all the elements of  a book into a movie (it would be extremely long) but when you completely warp the plot it just pisses me off. That's why I can't stand the movie Eragon. It made me want to pull my hair out. Another movie where I was muttering the whole way through.

So, really, is it inconceivable to follow the same basic plot of a book in its film adaption?