The books. There is a lot that you are missing in the movies because they obviously only have so much time to condense the books to. You get a lot more of Fred and George in the books and they are the best and funniest. There are also tons of characters that are left out in the movies. You miss a lot of information that just makes the world that is Harry Potter come together. And you don’t get to hear Harry’s thoughts in the movies. Which is the best part of reading!
Books. The movies cut out so much of the story unnecessarily, the marauders were especially hard done by in the movies. I did enjoy the movies but the books are way better.
books! the movies just cut out too much and it’s not in harry’s perspective which is what I think helped you understand a lot of reasoning for why things happened
Is that even a question? Chris Columbus is a moron of first degree. Every other director has been a disappointment. Nothing, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING can compare to the sublime experience that is the writing of JK Rowling. (And accompanied by the voice of Stephen Fry in audio book )
For once I saw the films first as I just couldn’t get into the books. I am enjoying the books much more now that I have the film characters in my mind. Surprising to me.
Books. Films you can see later judt like to keep track of everything, but books deffinitely. Maybee films are needed also for portraying characters better, you know, to keep them in front of you when you read, but that’s all. With HP books are 10 and films are 3
I had a hard time reading them but then I tried the audio books and the reader is AMAZING so entertaining and kept my focus it helped that I followed along but def books all they way much much better
I think it really depends. I didnt read the books til now (I’m 29) and love the movies. I definitely see a different between both of them. I do like that I had a visual before reading.
Books ? love the films but literally found myself critiquing them when they came out… and what they could have done better… or pissed when certain things were left out lol
Books, hands down, no contest. The movies leave out SOO much and rush through some pretty important background info that you might easily miss if you hadn’t read the books first
Debatable. At times I thought the books were REALLY childish, to the point I was almost cringing just reading it. But on the other hand they offer a lot of content not in the movies. Where was S.P.E.W. and Peeves in the movies? They’re both mentioned in multiple books.
I think the movies have the upper hand in action scenes. The Basilisk fight in the book version of Chamber of Secrets is nowhere near as epic in the movie, and the Hungarian Horntail remains grounded in the book version of Goblet of Fire: it doesn’t break free and go flying after Harry, breaking and smashing things in its way like it does in the movie.
@Jimmy yeah but the dragons in the books are mother dragons protecting eggs…sort of the point of the task. Films completely ignore logic and backstory multiple times. But yeah obviously a better action scene. It’s just such a richly detailed world in the books that the films miss out completely.
books of course
The books
Books
Books easily! I thought they did a good job with the films.
Books, there’s just so much more in the books that didn’t make it into the films.
Both,
No doubt the books!
Books!
If I absolutely had to pick…I don’t like either…I’d go for the books.
The books, but I love them both
The books. There is a lot that you are missing in the movies because they obviously only have so much time to condense the books to. You get a lot more of Fred and George in the books and they are the best and funniest. There are also tons of characters that are left out in the movies. You miss a lot of information that just makes the world that is Harry Potter come together. And you don’t get to hear Harry’s thoughts in the movies. Which is the best part of reading!
The books, but I do enjoy the movies too
Books definitely.
Neither
??
Neither.
Books
Book!!
Love both but books!
Books are always better
? you people saying neither could have just kept scrolling instead of announcing you don’t like Harry Potter… The post obviously wasn’t for you then
@Elizabeth I like your response to it. Neither is not answering the question.
I nearly always prefer the book to the movie, HP is no exception.
I like the movies. I tried the books and dnfd the first one lol
movies
Books
Books. The movies cut out so much of the story unnecessarily, the marauders were especially hard done by in the movies. I did enjoy the movies but the books are way better.
Books
books! the movies just cut out too much and it’s not in harry’s perspective which is what I think helped you understand a lot of reasoning for why things happened
Books ?
BOOKS
The Movie
Books, the movies missed sooooo much!
Films
Books…. obviously
Books
Books, but…I did enjoy the films too.
Books
All of it! 🙂
Books. You know right you are asking this to all the book lovers. We love books more than anything. LoL
Books.
Books
Books
Books
I haven’t read all the books, so for that reason I am going to say movies 🙂
Books
I love them both equally.
Both
Only time I’ve ever enjoyed the movie as much as the book. Also, the only time I’ve ever enjoyed the sequels as much as the original
I prefer the books, but definitely enjoy the movies 🙂
Books!
Books for sure! Although I did like the movies a lot also.
Books but movies are good too.
books
Books!
There have been very few times….and by few I mean maybe 2… That a movie has been better than the book. I love the HP series.
Books but the movies are awesome too
Books 1000% but I enjoy the movies
Is that even a question? Chris Columbus is a moron of first degree. Every other director has been a disappointment. Nothing, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING can compare to the sublime experience that is the writing of JK Rowling. (And accompanied by the voice of Stephen Fry in audio book )
Although I feel that the movies were made really well and I enjoy them, I prefer the books.
The books
Both are awesome
Books are better imo
Books! Movies 1+2 do a good job 3 is okay, 4-7 it’s like they made the movie off the cliff notes. And then made stuff up.
Books. Allthough the movies are nicely done
Books
Books! Goblet of fire has a big storyline and at least 2 characters that were not in the movie.
I preferred the books.
Books!
Books
The illustrated books ?
Books ❤️ I like the movies as well but I prefer the books
I enjoyed both but books are definitely better.. No doubt about it
books!!
The Books are way better.
Books. Rowling created a world with so many magnificent detail that it’s impossible to recreate all of it in acceptable screen time.
Books
still haven’t finished the books so films
BOOKS.BOOKS BOOKS
Books.
Books
Books
Books??
Come on, you asked it in a book club xD
I’m less sure about the first six but the Deathly Hallows Book is a million times better than the films
Books
Books by a mile!!!!
For once I saw the films first as I just couldn’t get into the books. I am enjoying the books much more now that I have the film characters in my mind.
Surprising to me.
@Allison same happened to me with Game of Thrones
Booooooooooks.
#Books
Books!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
books
Books. Films you can see later judt like to keep track of everything, but books deffinitely. Maybee films are needed also for portraying characters better, you know, to keep them in front of you when you read, but that’s all. With HP books are 10 and films are 3
Prefer the books
Both
On a book site? ?
Films
Books
BOOKS!!!
I have absolutely no patience to actually go through all 7 Novels, so the Films are for me.
I had a hard time reading them but then I tried the audio books and the reader is AMAZING so entertaining and kept my focus it helped that I followed along but def books all they way much much better
Both better but I think book is best
Books
Both
Books r best though ?
Films
I think it really depends. I didnt read the books til now (I’m 29) and love the movies. I definitely see a different between both of them. I do like that I had a visual before reading.
Books ? love the films but literally found myself critiquing them when they came out… and what they could have done better… or pissed when certain things were left out lol
B O O K S ?
Books because the films left out so many funny scenes.
Books, hands down, no contest. The movies leave out SOO much and rush through some pretty important background info that you might easily miss if you hadn’t read the books first
Books
Why is this even a Question?? ??
BOOOOOOKS!
well I decided not to watch the movies as long as I read, listen to the books sooo… Books
BOOKSSSS
Films. I read the first two books and could not get into them.
Both!! I watched the movies, and I liked them but I wasn’t obsessed. Read the books, and now I can’t get enough of either
Books. Films aren’t great in comparison. Poor adaptations and miss most of the pertinent points from the overall plot.
try one chapter on the book and a whole film to see the difference
Debatable. At times I thought the books were REALLY childish, to the point I was almost cringing just reading it. But on the other hand they offer a lot of content not in the movies. Where was S.P.E.W. and Peeves in the movies? They’re both mentioned in multiple books.
I think the movies have the upper hand in action scenes. The Basilisk fight in the book version of Chamber of Secrets is nowhere near as epic in the movie, and the Hungarian Horntail remains grounded in the book version of Goblet of Fire: it doesn’t break free and go flying after Harry, breaking and smashing things in its way like it does in the movie.
@Jimmy yeah but the dragons in the books are mother dragons protecting eggs…sort of the point of the task. Films completely ignore logic and backstory multiple times. But yeah obviously a better action scene. It’s just such a richly detailed world in the books that the films miss out completely.
Books
Books for me, purely because I read them first so I noticed how much the movies skipped or got wrong!