
"The book is much better than the film."
Have you ever wondered why people always say that?
Partly it is because it makes the person saying it feel more intelligent because books are seen as more of an intellectual medium than films. Similarly, books require a lot more time and effort from their audience than your average film does... people will often feel more rewarded by something that has kept them amused for 10+ hours and required them to use their imaginations over a 90-minute jaunt at the cinema.
Ultimately though, can we really ever compare books to films? They are two different types of medium with completely different purposes.
Consider how much money it takes to create a film... millions and millions of dollars. If the film wasn't able to keep hundreds of thousands of people happy and entertained then it would lose a ridiculous amount of money. Books, on the other hand, cost far less to produce and are therefore able to appeal to a smaller audience.
Twilight, Harry Potter, The Da Vinci Code, Where the Wild Things Are, Pride and Prejudice, The Kite Runner, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, The Devil Wears Prada, Jurassic Park, Bridget Jones's Diary. These are all examples of films which you may well have enjoyed, but run the risk of someone patronisingly turning to you and saying 'the book is much better though!'
At the end of the day though... the films are trying to do much different things (aside from make money).
You can't invite a few friends over to read a book like you can with a film.
You can't include enough multi-layered humour to keep both adults and young children fully entertained in a book the way a lot of films do.
You can't show a tiny half-smile between two friends in a book without writing a good long paragraph about the whole thing , whereas a film can do this in less than a second.
You can't have a massive action sequence in a book without having to somehow dress it up with engaging language and metaphors... but a film can simply show whatever the writer wants to show you.
Books can't give you something visually beautiful like a piece of art, but have to rely on you to do all the work in your head... but a film can make every single frame look like a beautiful painting.
By no means am I trying to tell you that films are better than books... I am simply making the point that it is not easy to compare one medium to another. You will however, be doing exactly that in comparing the websites that you have made with your horror movie posters!
Activity:
Once you have pasted the evaluation of your horror movie poster and the evaluation of your website front page into one word document, I would like you to answer the following questions in full sentences underneath.
1. Imagine you are seeing both your horror movie poster and your website for the first time. Which of these do you think is the most likely to persuade you to see the film and why?
2. How would you make sure as many people as possible got to see your website?
3. How would you make sure as many people as possible got to see your poster?
4. Do you think it is easier to get lots of website visits or to get lots of people to see a poster?
5. Internet Advertising or Print Advertising - which do you think is the most cost-effective and why?
6. Websites need to be constantly updated and have someone making sure that they work. They can also be changed and redesigned whenever you want. How does this give them a disadvantage and advantage over posters?
7. Think of the age-range you are advertising to... are they more likely to be persuaded by a website or a poster?
*Extension Questions*
8. What genres of film do you think are best suited to using internet marketing and which genres are better suited to print?
9. If you wanted to create a weird or 'viral' marketing campaign for your film to capture people's imaginations and get them talking about your film... what might you do?
10. Do you think we will still have printed advertising in 10 years time and why?








