He offers several hypotheses, but the one I find most convincing initially is:
I almost always read novels in bits. That is, I put the book down for a few times before finishing it.
I rarely watch movies in bits. That just seems wrong. But, assuming we are watching on DVD, why? Why do pauses ruin a movie but not a book?
2. Most books are longer than most movies, but there is otherwise no good reason for the difference in our consumption pattern.I find this one convincing simply because if there is a book that takes less than two hours to read, I usually read it in one sitting. I tend to think that any movie over 1 hour and 45 minutes is too long, anyway, so I have no problem pausing DVDs and watching the rest later if they are over 2 hours.
Another reason I would add:
- with books, it is easier to look back at an earlier section for a piece of information if your forget, even with the scene selection on DVDs
The ever-wise Natasha notes that we are mostly likely to read action novels -- such as The da Vinci Code -- straight through without pause. But action movies are the easiest to watch in bits. Ever try just a half hour of Jackie Chan? Wonderful. But breaking up a good drama is criminal.What are your thoughts on this?
(Source: Marginal Revolution)