This is quite an interesting question, though I don’t really have much to say about it. I would have had, if I’d continued to misread it like I initially did, but the actual question is this: How do you feel about movie novelisations? (So not ‘how do you feel about movies based on a novel’?)
Frankly, the only movie novelisation I can ever remember reading is Ghostbusters (way back when the original film came out). I have no idea how I got hold of it. I must have borrowed it from somebody, because it’s certainly not part of my own extensive book collection. I also remember very little of it except for one scene, where Sigourney Weaver (whatever her character was called again) is possessed by one of the ghosts and is floating above the bed. In the novel she is wearing some sort of sheer dress through which her breasts are clearly visible (or something like that), and I remember thinking to myself that that wasn’t like it was in the film. I may have even watched the film again, just to make sure.
Anyway, I’m not really sure how much of a thing they are. Let’s face it, loads of films these days are book adaptations to start with, so there’s not much point in writing the book of the film of the book. I also get the feeling that books after the film are more of a merchandising thing – let’s use another way of milking more money out of people, shall we?
So really, I just have no opinion. If a film comes out that I want to see and I know there’s already a book (that I haven’t read yet), I generally try to read the book first. If there’s a book after the film… I don’t really notice, I suppose.
Original question and answers are on Jay Dee’s blog here.