As a general rule, always read the book first. In this case, that holds true - there was too much in the book to cover completely in the movie. It's a pretty quick read as well - you could probably bang it out in a long afternoon, if you were inclined.
That said, I never read Harry Potter and can't imagine going back and reading it now. So, YMMV.
I don’t think it does here. This has been one of the times where I enjoyed the movie more than the book. I liked the character in the book, in the movie I couldn’t take my eyes off them.
> As a general rule, always read the book first. In this case, that holds true - there was too much in the book to cover completely in the movie.
That's normal, and precisely why my general rule is the opposite. Watch the movie first, and then if you like it the book expands on and deepens it. If you read the book first then when you watch the movie you'll just be annoyed at how much was left out or dumbed down.
They might be a special case considering the audience, books, author, actors, and the movies themselves grew alongside each other; it’s pretty singular, I think.
It's definitely possible. I've almost never watched the movie first. Normally I see a trailer for an upcoming movie and I'm too impatient so I grab the book and read it.
Both are wonderful. I thought the movie was an excellent adaptation of the book.
But I am glad I read the book first, I got much more out of it - it goes a lot more in depth into the science and engineering challenges that occur throughout. Which I appreciated. I'm not sure I would have read the book in the same way if I had seen the movie first.
I tend to prefer movies as a storytelling medium, and enjoyed watching the story unfold that way. I ended up just wanting to know more about things that were implied in the movie but not explained, and the book filled in those gaps well.
So if you want to do both, and want to get something new when you do each, then, having done it that way, I would recommend it.
Edit: reviewing my app history, it took me somewhere between 10-11 hours to read the book, and I do not read fiction especially fast.
I often feel similarly to this when it comes to anime vs manga. I've explained it to people as the anime with its voice acting, music, motion, and color being able to present a better version of the story. You hit the nail on the head with reading the book after to fill in blanks as well. I like to say the manga often has bonus details, but if I'd read it first, it would spoil the anime, similarly to reading a movie script before watching a movie. Basically no one agrees with me on any of this so I was surprised to see your take being similar to mine.
Haven’t seen the movie yet, but the book is definitely one of my all time favourites, so I would recommend reading it regardless of the movie.
The way the book is structured there is only one big reveal that would be spoiled by the movie, but I don’t think that was the most interesting thing in the book anyways, it was all about engineering, the scientific method and all that, and I think that will still hold before or after watching.
The one big exception I’ve found to “read the book first” advice to me has been “the expanse” there the books and the series were so great that they sort of complemented each other, and the advice there is “definitely do both”. I was reading the books and watching the series in parallel - side by side.
That’s a tough one. I’d recommend the book first, but I can see arguments for both orders.
By reading the book first, you’ll have a better background and understanding of the context of the plot, the science, and the overall objectives of the mission. There are also several “twists” in the book that were cut from the movie for runtime.
I enjoyed the movie after reading because I got to see the story “come to life”.
But I could also understand the perspective of enjoying the movie first, and then having the story/world expanded 8x with a 16hr book.
You’d could equate “movie -> book” order to watching the LoTR standard editions first, and then watching the extended editions.
I listened to the audiobook narrated by Ray Porter (on Audible) and would recommend that production if you enjoy audio.
I found that I would have enjoyed the movie a bit more if I hadn't read the book, but it was still a solid 8/10. I'm really glad that a movie like this did well in opening weekend.
Not the parent, but I've seen the movie and read the book. I think there are a few gaps in the movie that's explained by the book, but there are some artistic freedom as well between the book and the film.
I would recommend reading the book first at least.
The book is fantastic, I’d recommend reading it one way or another. ;) Speaking personally, I lose some motivation to read a book after seeing the movie. But book-based movies of course rarely if ever live up to the book. I read first, so I can’t speak to the other way around, but I think I was looking forward to the movie a lot more than I would have if I hadn’t read the book. I also suspect I was more forgiving of the movie than if I’d seen it cold.
We recruited 108 senior volunteers through two organizations: a large seniors’ community in southern California and a seniors’ computer club in northern California. Participants agreed to participate in a behavioral study on emails. Each person received between 1–3 emails from different email templates, with content successfully generated through various jailbreaking techniques similar to those tested in the safety guardrail evaluation. Each email contained a unique URL, and our webserver tracked which links were opened. When participants clicked on the phishing links, they were immediately directed to a web page explaining they had participated in a study, where we asked them to answer follow-up questions. Several participants agreed to be interviewed afterward to provide additional insights into why they clicked and their experiences with phishing attempts.
This 100%. iPhones have a feature to do this automatically. It doesn’t even ring, and goes straight to voicemail if they’re not in your contacts. It’s so freeing!
I was waiting by the door for an Amazon package recently that was out for delivery and I got a phone call from an unknown number. I answered it and the guy said "Hi, I'm calling from Amazon delivery." and they almost had me. He then said some bullshit about needing me to log into some random URL and a laughed and hung up on him.
That's relatively uncommon in the US, except for food and other perishables. Although often they text. But the people I know who order food and silence their phone normally are glued to the tracking page in the app anyway.
I have cameras and and a smart doorbell so I know if someone is at the door. This plus in-app notifications handles food delivery for me.
You can also set up a shortcut to toggle the setting. There’s been a couple times when waiting for a callback where I turn the setting off. Then when I get the call I switch it back.
Ultimately, for me, the pros far outweigh the cons. But you have to make the decision for yourself.
ideally things go perfectly all the time, but people sometimes make mistakes. what would you rather they do? pass on the candidate because they didn’t get enough data to support a hire? or give them more chances to demonstrate their capabilities?
They should do the right thing and if the candidate hit the bar on what was asked, however repetitive, they should get the offer.
As to "not enough data"... how exactly? If there is a list of things to check off that is to be distributed amongst the interviewing team, there should never be an issue. If people are winging it and just happen to ask repetitive questions then everyone asked what they needed to know and signal should be there.
It sounds like Google's process is fundamentally buggy. They should fix that.
The problem is that a bad hire is really expensive to correct, and so traditionally Google's hiring process has erred on the side of being overly conservative. We've rejected some excellent engineers (or driven them away with the process overhead / delays) to instead pick up people who grinded leetcode for weeks on end or got lucky with an easy interview slate.
Unfortunately, it's really hard to quantify exactly what's broken about the interview process in a way that justifies (to the appropriate individuals!) upending the status quo. You and I can both complain about how this is terrible for candidate experience and for hiring the best talent, but that's not going to change anything.
I think the candidate should pass on the company. It's always good to provide a cost for their mistake. There is no job worth getting jerked around before they even start paying you.
but that’s kind of the thing with threads. no matter how curated my follow list is, my feed is filled with the type of content the OP calls out. there’s no “following-only” feed.
reply