Once again, the box office has been dominated by a movie adaptation. Set in a dystopian world, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire had fans lining up at midnight on opening day.

The craze brings back memories of British wizards and pale vampires falling in love. Let’s not get swept up in the fandom of the Hunger Games, only to forget the horrors of movies that are adapted out of books.

Harry Potter and Twilight are examples of how the truth is self-evident; books are far better than movies and never should the former be adapted into the latter.

No movie screen could possibly capture the detail or magic that comes with words and the freedom of imagination. Words can be descriptive, but also allow the reader to use their imagination to interpret the material, with each person creating a world unique to their mind. The magic of imagination is what allows the reader to be swept up in the romance and mystery of the story.

Once a face has been given to every detail from hair color to height, the reader’s right to have their own individualized version of the story has been taken away, only to be left with a mass produced story of mediocre quality.

No movie has had an adequate running time to faithfully adapt the entirety of a novel. The Harry Potter novels were good, but the movie, unsurprisingly, left out or changed many details.

Let’s not even begin with the embarrassment of the Twilight series. An average book being adapted into an awful movie is barely worth mentioning.

So now we are back to The Hunger Games adaptation, which I hate to admit, compares favorably to the books. However, the Catching Fire is not without faults. The movie’s attempt to capture every detail of the book makes the movie feel rushed, yet too long.

For those who have yet to see the Hunger Games movies, please read the books first. Judge for yourself, and see how the adaptation stands against the original