Heart of the City by Steenz for October 02, 2014

“The Hobbit” is not based on a cartoon, movie, or TV show. The book came first. Or does Dean not know that?

@Dean pick another Tolkien book that has not been dramatized, The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings were not the only books that he wrote.

@LtPowers, you would be surprised.

SueB1863: A good teacher will notice where the visual medium differed from the book and the trap is sprung. I have only found one case where a movie was better than the book, the rest, the book was better.

Me too Dean.

Leaf by Niggle

Science fiction? How about “20,000 Leagues Under the Sea,” or “Journey to the Center of the Earth?” Maybe “The Time Machine?” I’m sure people can name some others.

And I’d like to see English teachers become a little more creative about movies versus books. For example: offer a choice of a book report or a movie report. For the latter, the student must name the director, the producer, and the names of the principal actors. And, of course, the name of the studio/production company that made the film. They must describe the plot/action/theme of the film, all of the essentials that would be in a book report, but revised for movies.

For extra credit, offer a combined report: comparison of book and movie; how they are alike, how they differ, etc.. I’ll bet you’d see much more student interest in both art forms from such a thing as this.

Bonus question: how many of you out there have seen the movie “Gone with the Wind” AND read the novel?

Excuse me ,I have been out of school for nearly 50 years !<pI ! have never ever heard the expression "Chapter Book "until this toon mentioned it !,So WTH is a chapter book ??????

Then, the teachers must not be too bright. It is a rare movie which is a decent adaption of a book. A couple of questions will let a teachef know if the student has seen the movie or actually read the book.

In my experience I would go to read the book, after I saw the movie, just to see where they differed. Many times I found the movie interpretation leaves out whole subplots, even in the children’s books. Someone mentioned Charlotte’s Web, that is one example. I remember Hobbit, even the very early cartoon version didn’t cover the book. There are reasons for the omissions because the thought process, for example isn’t easily translated into the visual…I remember the book Gone with the Wind and the movie were very close, down to the description of the clothes.

catzilla23: Short story does not qualify, not divided into chapters..Night-Gaunt49: Unfortunately, when I was that age, there were no children’s books on dinosaurs. I had to use my dad’s geology textbook. But my dad was one of the last of the clergy/naturalists that established the science, and indeed was until his death in 1993, just as he had finished his nature column for the local newspaper..What ? Me Worried ?: I owned and operated a bookstore, took a course in children’s literature in 1992, and had mostly junior and senior high school kids as testplayers in developing my role-playing game, and I never heard “chapter book” until this strip arc – but I could figure it out..squirrelchaser: Which is why one should not depend on Wikipedia. It is merely a book of sufficient length and complexity as to need to be divided into chapters. Granted, that is the level where most kids will encounter chapter books, but it is hardly restricted to those.

Not really. Usually you have to pick a book from a list of pre-selected ones. Not that you’re old enough to figure out what you’d be interest in from a novel.