movie poster book covers

[dovener's cape]

I went into a bookstore the other day to buy Atonement by Ian McEwan and the only copies in the store had the movie poster as the front cover. It always bothers me when they put movie posters as the book covers because it takes away from the book a little. It makes the movie seem more important than the book: like in high school when everyone just wanted to see the movie version rather than read the original even though hollywood at the best of times can't make a better movie.

so I was wondering, am I the only one with this issue? how do all of you feel about it?

 

[Jez]

I agree with you. I hate it when they do that and I agree with you that it takes the focus away from the book. They're usually uglier covers too.

 

[Landslide]

I agree too. It gives the impression that the book tells the story of the movie and not the other way around...

 

[lionsroar13]

totally agree, dont like those covers!

 

[Stewart]

I certainly don't buy movie tie-ins and spent a great deal of time looking around the Glasgow shops for copies of Richard Matheson's I Am Legend and Cormac McCarthy's No Country For Old Men, which I finally got.

The only time I've ever bought anything approaching a movie tie-in is when the book comes in a Penguin Modern Classic edition. They don't tend to have movie posters, but a still from the movie, keeping the format of the book series. A few examples, being Eileen Chang's Lust, Caution and Ian Fleming's You Only Live Twice:

 

[RAC42]

The one I dislike the most, so far, would have to be I, Robot.



It is a pretty good marketing ploy though. I always find tons of these books in the second hand stores shortly after the movie comes out. People rush out to buy the book after seeing the movie and are disappointed that it is not the same story and dump them all at the used book shops.

For awhile there, it was all the Bourne books by Ludlum.

 

[beer good]

For the most part, I agree (and I'm furious with myself for not picking up a copy of Atonement before that hideous movie tie-in cover came out). That Lust, Caution cover is beautiful, though - and I didn't even know it was a scene from the movie until just now. (Thanks a lot, Stewart. )

You have to wonder if people feel cheated when they buy a book because Will Smith is in it, and then find out that not only is the lead character nothing like Will Smith, but the ending is completely different too... no wonder people supposedly don't read anymore, if they're made to think that the book is a second-class version of the movie. If you have to have a photo on the cover, put the author on it.

 

[Sybarite]

I wouldn't say I never would or have, but generally speaking I'd prefer not to.

While it's possible that people who buy the book, having seen the film, could be disappointed, surely something that inspires people to try a book has to, generally, be a good thing?

How many people have read the work of Jane Austen or Charles Dickens, for instance, because they enjoyed a big screen of TV adaptation?

 

[Zolipara]

I dont mind really, and i understand that they want to take advantage of the marketing for the movie. But then again i cant remember the last time i bought a book after seeing a movie. I usually take the movie for what it is and read another book instead.

 

[sparkchaser]

Ugh. I hate that too.

I'll go out of my way to find a cover that is not movie related.

 

[Sybarite]

Since, as stated above, I'd rather avoid a tie-in cover, I checked on Amazon.co.uk and found the most recent non-film cover. So I've ordered that for under a fiver.

It's amazing what threads on a forum can inspire one to do.

 

[Fantasy Moon]

I guess it depends on the book/movie for me. Usually I don't care and have a lot of movie tie-in covers sitting on my shelves. Usually it's the classics that I might spazz and need a certain edition without a movie poster on the cover.

 

[Frozeninside]

For me I'll wait to find the none movie cover book, with the exception of High Fidelity I don't mine looking at John Cusack

 

[venusunfolding]

The regular Atonement shouldn't be that hard to find. They're still printing non-movie covers.

You have to admit they work though. How many of you are looking for the books because the promotion for the movie made you think it was a good story? Must be a lot since so many of you are looking for recent books that have been made into movies.

 

[beer good]

How many of you are looking for the books because the promotion for the movie made you think it was a good story? Must be a lot since so many of you are looking for recent books that have been made into movies.

In my case, it's more that two books I've already been meaning to read for a while (Atonement and No Country For Old Men) got turned into movies I'd very much like to see, but I don't want to do it before I've read the book. I would have read the books anyway, it just got a little more urgent...

Also, it's annoying when a book you already love gets turned into a movie and you try to get people who liked the movie to read the book, but can't find them a copy that doesn't look like an ad for something they've already seen...

 

[Nay3187]

I agree, i don't like it when they re release a book with movie artwork. Certainly in doing so it is profitable to the authors because it makes people buy the book who otherwise wouldn't have.

The reason i don't like them is because i find that having movie art work as a cover limits your imagination. Its the same as when you watch a movie then read the book... you automatically picture the characters they are in the movie, and not how you would persevere them.

 

[venusunfolding]

.

The reason i don't like them is because i find that having movie art work as a cover limits your imagination. Its the same as when you watch a movie then read the book... you automatically picture the characters they are in the movie, and not how you would persevere them.

If that's the case, do you find books that have photographs on the cover limiting to the imagination as well?

 

[Nay3187]

If that's the case, do you find books that have photographs on the cover limiting to the imagination as well?

Not so much, no. It’s more of putting a name to face kind of thing. If the book has a photograph of a person on the front, unless the book describes a character that matches that person, it usually doesn't sway my imagination. But I suppose sometimes when writers have photographs of someone on the cover, could that be who they want you to picture.....?

 

[Stewart]

If that's the case, do you find books that have photographs on the cover limiting to the imagination as well?

Don't be mad. Covers with photographs can be wonderful, as this range of Modern Classics available in Canada shows:

​

​

​

Now, as regards some film-ties, check out the differences, original on the left, film-tie on the right:

​

​

​

The last one (on the left) is actually a special edition so I wouldn't say it's the best design. But it's got to be better than having Will Smith on the cover and then diving into the pages to find out that Neville is blonde. No Country For Old Men cover is okay, but I'd still prefer the original. And the Atonement tie-in is awful - colourful, and no more than a showcase of the actors in the adaptation, whereas the original is grainy, and stirs the imagination.

 

[angerball]

I don't like books with 'movie covers' either. I prefer the original covers, as it leaves the characters more to the imagination. Also, it looks better.