Is watching a movie the same thing as reading a book

>>8357384
No. In the case of the former one watches a movie, whereas in the latter one reads a book.

They are qualitatively different experiences

>>8357393
Not necessarily. There are menu similarities. You didn't prove anything sir.

>>8357398

>There are menu similarities

??

You are comparing apples with bananas, it's that simple. The argument is that since they are different things in essence, their experience differ in principle.

It's like comparing the taste of, well, apples and bananas. Of course there are vague similarities, but no wise man would say those make them "equal" in any way.

>>8357418
You're just speaking nonsense. Movies and books tell stories in the same way

File: baiteater.jpg (26KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 625x626px

>>8357423

>Movies and books tell stories in the same way

I refuse to fall for the bait anymore than I have already done

>>8357384
is an audio book the same as reading a book?

>>8357427
I'm not baiting I just don't understand how u can't see the very similar parallels

File: image.jpg (163KB, 1020x1360px) Image search: [Google]

163KB, 1020x1360px

>>8357384
>is x y?

>>8357433

It's not THAT they tell stories what makes them different. It's HOW they tell them that is important.

>>8357453
Aren't you reading when you watch a movie with subtitles? Or watch a silent movie? There's a lot of similiRties don't deny that

Hey /lit/,

is Unorthodox Concept A true?

I am hereby officially gracing you with the burden of proof!

Best regards.

>>8357384
How do you mean? Reading books is objectively a better positive experience for your brain. It's been proven that your brain activity is higher and your brain is more engaged reading books than staring at a screen.

Don't get me wrong I love movies too.

>>8357492
You have to admit their similar though

>>8357492
>objectively better

>>8357504
True

>>8357384
Obviously not. Movies work within the senses.

>>8357518
>your brain activity is higher and your brain is more engaged reading books than staring at a screen, and therefore it is objectively better experience for your brain to read books than to watch movies

non-sequitur

>>8357384
No, Billy. We're glad you learned that using a keyboard is not the same as throwing a ball, but you should really practise throwing a ball some more since you got so good at this typing thing. It's okay if you throw your keyboard by accident again too. We'd be glad to see that trick.

>>8357557
Are you calling me stupid ?0

>>8357561
Of course not, Billy; you're just special.

>>8357574
Just stop bruh not cool. I was just curious

>>8357579
Ya

>>8357471
Holy fuck. Get off this board.

This thread is absolute shit.

>>8357625
What did I say that bothered you axactly

>>8357631
What

>>8357657
What

>>8357722
Ya

>>8357384
Yes. They are literally the exact same thing.

>>8357783
Thought so

>>8357789
Nice

>>8357799
Ya

>>8357492
[citation needed]

Visual media - text, still art, film - are ontologically similar, and differ phenomenologically only because that's what people have made each medium and the how they are "supposed" to be experienced out to be. For all intents and purposes you're probably not going to "read" films the same way you do a novel, but the line between what it means to read anything at all is a gray area; if you want to get technical there's arguably no philosophically substantial difference.

I had film professors who would pause films every shot and ask what every element - framing, mes, cinematography, editing, ie basic stuff - was doing and how it was contributing to the narrative, how it could tie into some theory or meaning of the film, and so on. The process could take up to 8 hours at a time. Sounds pretty engaged to me.

>>8357870
Ya

>>8357942

>>8357962

File: image.jpg (48KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 480x360px

>this thread
Sage'd.

>>8358015
Why

>>8357482
Underrated as fuck

>>8358087
Why

>>8358089

>>8358111

>>8358157

>>8357393
I acquiesce this. Only because there can be significant overlap.

>>8358235
Stop

>>8358239

File: 1460872028370.jpg (21KB, 228x320px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 228x320px

>>8357384
Literature its art.
If films its like literature them its are art; them vidego games are art.
Video Games are NOT art. So fuck off to >>>/tv/.
Nice try, OP.
But that

>>8358507
What

>>8358515
Oh

>>8357384
yes

everything is ideal

>>8358634
Hand

>>8358650

Is August the same as September?

I wish...

>>8358802

Some films could be equated to a short story or novella. Other films are basically trash. A movie would have to be very long to be as mentally engaging as a good book.

How do you report same-fagging?

Does the janitor see only one report at a time, or if multiple are reported will they get the picture?

>>8358841
Do you think there is same flagging in this thread or something?

>>8357384
Obviously not dumb ass.

>>8358842

>>8358847
Explain your point. Nobody in this thread has really proved me wrong or convinced me otherwise

>>8358848

>Is watching... the same thing as reading ...

is licking the same thing as tasting?

>>8358872
You can read without using your eyes, dummy.

Invalid analogy.

>>8358873
Dude

>>8358850
what? you asked a question

You use your imagination when reading a book and you simply consume when watching a movie. OBEY. DON'T THINK.

>>8357628
shit op gets shit thread

File: 1466939322225.jpg (25KB, 321x322px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 321x322px

>>8357431
Very good point

>>8358940
(By which I mean of course that yes, an audio book and reading a book is the same thing)

>>8358944
No

>>8359996
Yes

>>8360078
No

>>8360163
Yes

>thread about book has 12 replies
>thread about movies has 74 replies
???water fUck happen???

>>8360216
No

>>8360217
Yes