I know we've all heard it before: 'The movie wasn't as good as the book'. Or 'the movie was different than the book!' But in all seriousness, is that a bad thing? I mean really, do we expect the two and a half hour movie to perfectly match the twenty chapter book? Books are designed to have more detail, after all. Personally, I think if the book is a bit different than the movie, that's okay!
What happens when you read a book? When I do, I imagine what the characters look like, how they sound, and the expressions they make. Now don't get me wrong, it's absolutely amazing to see your favorite books come to life! But if the movie has a different ending, or the plot is slightly different, I look at it as another amazing experience. For example, the Divergent series. (Look away if you haven't seen them and don't want to be spoiled!). The second book, Insurgent, is pretty different when it comes to the whole thing with the box, and opening it and blah blah blah... But I found it just as entertaining, and it was cool to see a different take on the book.
Personally with the Hunger Games series, I thought they did wonderful with keeping it accurate with the books. They also made it suspenseful, even though I knew what was going to happen. But there were a few scenes I loved from the books that weren't in the movies. We have to keep in mind when regarding the transferring of books to movies, that the producers need to make sure the plot makes sense to the people who haven't read the books (those hooligans!).
So what do you guys and gals think? Should the movies match the books to a T? Or is it okay for there to be differences in plot, endings, or characters? Or do you think certain books should even be made into movies?