Film or Paper?

Generally in the world, when a great book is published it will almost always be turned into a film. Some novels are great for turning into films, books such as Harry Potter and The Lord of the Rings. Yet in my opinion, a book like Waiting for Godot is better left on paper. When you watch a movie a certain point of view is forced upon you, the directors point of view, which cuts you of from the way you thought it might be or the things you felt whilst reading it. But maybe it was supposed to happen, perhaps this was supposed to become a movie because ultimately Becket wrote it in play form. Even so whether you read or watch it, there is space open for interpretation since in the end there are thousands of people each with different points of view and opinions.

Every single person is different they all have different ways of seeing feeling and relating to things. What each of us feels is unique, so how do we know that what we are feeling is truly ours? Or could it be something that the director is telling us to feel?

For example, with the film Vladimir and Estragon talked relatively fast when they're talking. Whereas when reading the book I found it was rather slow, a montone doning on and on. With a tired run down voice tone, yet what I found in the film was that they we're sort of animated they responded each other as soon as one of them said something there weren't really any pauses in between the talking of one or the other. Another thing that was really different to me when comparing the book and the film was Lucky's speech. In the novel I had imagined him as a weathered, balding man with no coherence. Yet in the film he is younger than what I could have ever imagined with long hair and a voice filled with passion when he gave his speech.

Still my opinion could be completely different compared to someone else's, another person could have imagined Lucky just as the director imagined him... who knows?