For far too long, I’ve been terrorized by book lovers for my contention that movies are better than books.

Well it’s time for me to stand up for myself.

I don’t think books are useless, I just think that movies are clearly better, and I don’t even think it’s much of a fair fight.

There are plenty of non-fiction and philosophical books out there that allow one to reflect or to feel existential for a second or two.

But these types of books serve a purpose larger than what a make-believe story and a moral from a fiction book can provide.

This isn’t to chastise anyone who prefers the frivolous thrills of fiction books. People enjoy what they enjoy.

And that’s the point I’m trying to make – the whole debate centers on how you prefer to consume your art.

Some prefer to consume their art through brush strokes on canvas, whereas others prefer the work of a hammer and chisel.

Some prefer their own perception of a set of black words on white pages, whereas I prefer the art of a director’s vision and his interpretation of a script.

I must admit, I’m slightly biased in this discussion.

I love movies. They’re one of the only things in this world that make me truly happy.

To me, there’s no greater feeling than getting completely lost in the score and the cinematography of a film.

The cinematographer, or director of photography, is tasked with finding the correct light, angle and artistry of each shot.

Think back to some of the most visually beautiful films you’ve seen – films like “There Will Be Blood” and “The Tree of Life” – and try to remember the distinctive scenes that set those films apart from the rest.

That’s the cinematography of the film, and when it’s combined with a fitting score it becomes something you just can’t get from words on a page or even from your imagination.

This gets me to my next point: the claim that books are superior because they provide an insight into what a character is thinking that movies don’t is just bogus.

Granted, big box office stars have a hard time with any sort of real human emotion, but any true actor worth his/her salt knows how to express a complex emotion through a coordinated set of mannerisms.

But also, if the draw of a book is that it’s so heavily reliant on the reader’s imagination, then why is this insight into a character’s thoughts even necessary? Why not just imagine it?

I have a hunch that there are others who tend to agree with me, but won’t speak out at the risk of being called unintelligent or uncultured by book lovers.

So to all of the closet movie junkies out there, crawl from the woodwork and stand up to the rampant book lover bullying. It has gone too far.

[email protected]