I saw the film first, and when I read the book later I thought "Wow, reading the book adds a lot of depth to it". As an added plus, if you watch the film first, you'll be able to sit down reading the book hearing Edward Norton's voice narrating the whole thing. (I reckon the casting was damn near perfect for it)
I'd be tempted to say film first as a result: you get the shallower version, rather than reading the book first and thinking "Hmmm, not as good as I expected". It's not that the book is way better... it's just I always find saying "That wasn't in the film" (when reading the book later) is better than "They missed one of the best bits from the film" when you watch it after reading the book.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2005-07-11 04:17 pm (UTC)I'd be tempted to say film first as a result: you get the shallower version, rather than reading the book first and thinking "Hmmm, not as good as I expected". It's not that the book is way better... it's just I always find saying "That wasn't in the film" (when reading the book later) is better than "They missed one of the best bits from the film" when you watch it after reading the book.