Like many people, I am always inclined to argue that the book version of a story is better than the blockbuster film made of it. The imagination of characters is not necessarily what bothers me. Typically I don’t start reading the book until I’ve heard the movie version is about to come out (ex. Twilight, The Hunger Games, Sarah’s Key, etc.), so most of the time my idea of what a character looks like is defined by which actor is chosen to portray that particular role in the film. I like being able to put a face to a name. I also like the idea of imagining what the world would be like if the mythical creatures of Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter actually existed (even though the thoughts brought to my mind are a little frightening). What frustrates me about the movie version of a beloved book is how much detail is discarded by the filmmakers. It upsets me to see scenes I believed to be essential to the storyline tossed away or completely changed. Even the loss of minute details, like the fact that Harry Potter’s eyes are supposed to be green to resemble his mother’s or how in The Hunger Games the death of Katniss’s father is barely described.
In regards to my personal response to iconic photographic images, I don’t know that I necessarily have one. If I do, it’s usually not very significant. I’ve never been particularly moved by a photograph before. I look at the composition and say “Oh that looks nice” and then move on. Sometimes I look at the lighting or how I would portray it if I were to sketch it, but I never really take the time to think about the significance of the piece. If a picture really is worth a thousand words, then I should spend more time pondering the meaning or the story behind the photograph.