Does Hollywood ruin books? - Numberphile

Thanks Audible for sponsoring this video. Start a 30-day trial & receive a free audiobook at www.audible.com/numberphile or text numberphile to 500 500
More useful links & stuff in full description below ↓↓↓
Extra interview footage with Hannah in the recording booth: • Hannah in the Recordin...
Hi-res version of the movie/book plot at: www.bradyharanblog.com/blog/mo...
More videos with Hannah Fry: bit.ly/hannah_vids
Hannah's website: www.hannahfry.co.uk
Shout outs to Jordan Ellenberg and Walter Hickey.
Discuss this video on Brady's subreddit: redd.it/9aypks
Numberphile is supported by the Mathematical Sciences Research Institute (MSRI): bit.ly/MSRINumberphile
We are also supported by Science Sandbox, a Simons Foundation initiative dedicated to engaging everyone with the process of science. www.simonsfoundation.org/outr...
And support from Math For America - www.mathforamerica.org/
NUMBERPHILE
Website: www.numberphile.com/
Numberphile on Facebook: / numberphile
Numberphile tweets: / numberphile
Subscribe: bit.ly/Numberphile_Sub
Videos by Brady Haran
Editing and animation by Pete McPartlan
Patreon: / numberphile
Numberphile T-Shirts: teespring.com/stores/numberphile
Brady's videos subreddit: / bradyharan
Brady's latest videos across all channels: www.bradyharanblog.com/
Sign up for (occasional) emails: eepurl.com/YdjL9

[@KSignalEingang]

"Alright Diabetes" is my favorite unreleased Radiohead album.

[@MagicAccent]

Agreed. The best song being "unemployed humanoid". Very catchy.

[@ulture]

I heard that all the vocals had to be electronically lowered because Thom was singing in a pitch too high for human ears to register

[@loljustice31]

As a RH fan I appreciate this comment.

[@danieledgardo2122]

Could have seen from miles away, since they are the same group who made Pablo Honey

[@johnjackson9767]

Best comment.

[@Jiggerjaw]

Hannah is in everyone's top right triangle. She's out of everyone's league.

[@sewera.account]

Came here to say it!

[@BobElHat]

Hannah has diabetes and bad toenails? Damn. I still would though.

[@elfboi523]

When I become Emperor of the Galaxy, I will need Hannah's DNA for my clone army.

[@TheAlmightiest]

Jiggerjaw 3/10 So I wouldn't say that.

[@willtheoct]

shadepotatoe everyone is out of your league if you're that rude

[@CALEBMAESTRO]

Hannah Fry explains her take on the Universal Hot-Crazy Matrix.

[@VeteranVandal]

Woah! Maybe it is the same phenomenon!

[@curtiswfranks]

:O

[@fittony]

sounds like some theory that would of been out of How i met your mother back in the day

[@BloCKBu5teR]

it is

[@nanigopalsaha2408]

Come on guys! Let's make 113 comments before the likes change from 355.

[@U014B]

Yeah, you're gonna need to make that top right triangle a bit bigger.

[@pixelstormnetwork]

* A lot bigger *

[@guilhermeferrao5968]

I think the top right triangle actually overlaps the bottom left half.

[@squeakybunny2776]

LOL loving these comments

[@HenriFaust]

It's an infinite plane with a single border, so I don't think there's a problem with the size.

[@byron4545]

@@guilhermeferrao5968 I would never become a member of a club that accepts people like me.

[@vitalspark6288]

I have long held a related theory about why sequels are never as good as the original. It's basically a regression to the mean. First assume that films are usually of about average quality. When a film is significantly above average quality, a sequel will be commissioned. The sequel is a film, so will usually be of about average quality. Therefore the sequel will be worse than the original. If studios took the unorthodox approach of only commissioning sequels of terrible films, then the sequels (which will usually be of about average quality), will usually be better than the original.

[@kindlin]

Another perfect example of this phenomenon in action.

[@BruceGrembowski]

Some sequels are better. "Bride of Frankenstein" for one, "Godfather Part II" for another. But I guess those are the exceptions.

[@jiffylou98]

if every movie had a sequel then we would approach an even distribution.

[@DagarCoH]

Ethan Alfonso If every movie had a sequel we would have infinitely many movies...

[@jiffylou98]

DagarCoH if every movie is part of a series and every series had two entries I should say

[@MrSkinnyWhale]

6:18 Hannah chilling out by herself in the top right :)

[@WhiteThunder121]

10:20: I dont trust linear regressions when its harder to guess the direction of he correlation from the scatter plot than to find new constellations on it

[@AgglomeratiProduzioni]

8:20 "Scores on GoodReads tend to be quiet good." You can bet they are. They gave 4.34 to the Twilight saga. I mean, not that it is the worst book ever, but c'mon.

[@woutervanr]

Yeah, when every score is between 3.5 and 5 then those 1.5 points are worth a lot more.

[@blipmachine]

Hannah: Go with me on this for a second. Me: I would have gone with you to the end, into the very fires of Mordor 🤗

[@MegaTp4]

The title should have been: "Bad diabetics have good toenails"

[@jiffylou98]

or just "Alright Diabetes".

[@RichardEricCollins]

I only read technical manuals and no one has made a film of these. :( "Harry Potter and the 1980 - 1986 Mk3 Escort Repair manual".........

[@robertkeddie]

Hasn't that book about motorcycle maintenance been made into a film? Oh, wait a moment...

[@aetius31]

New Hannah Fry video, New 1 Million views video for numberfiles: No correlation.

[@ourboyroy9398]

Numberphiles* The suffix philes means lover so they're number lovers

[@Quantiad]

Brilliant :-)

[@MugYoda]

aetius31 I wonder if videos with Dr. Fry do in fact get more views than other Numberphile videos. My personal favourites are Dr.Grimes and Dr. Fry but I watch and enjoy all the Numberphile videos....

[@zacharytoth1065]

I like Matt Parker and Cliff Stoll too.

[@jimday666]

Holly Krieger also

[@2LegHumanist]

That's the first time I've ever heard anyone suggest the Martian movie was better than the book. I have only ever heard the opposite and I agree with that assessment. The book is absolutely hilarious.

[@jalilcompaore]

2LegHumanist did you know about the movie first or the book first?

[@cinderwild]

Yeah I liked the book more than movie. The movie did have a better ending though.

[@marlonyo]

the problem is that there is a second invisible variables how much you like books vs how much you like movies.

[@andersvincent]

Loved the book. Hated the movie.

[@2LegHumanist]

I hate reading. Most of the reading I do is technical textbooks, whitepapers and academic papers. So when it comes to recreational reading I don't have the time or patience. I probably sound like a paid shill for this video's sponsor, but I listen to audio books, which I can do without straining my eyes during otherwise wasted time (while driving, cycling etc.)

[@owendeheer5893]

i am happy to see hanna again in these vids!

[@wanlida.3648]

I love having Hannah Fry! She always teaches things that I enjoy learning about! Please have her do more Numberphile!

[@fanq_]

the Eragon movie hasn't even happened tho, doesn't exist, nope, nope

[@jonathangrey2183]

I noticed that too why was the movie rated better than the book?

[@fanq_]

@@jonathangrey2183 I think it's saying movie was really bad, and the book wasn't that great

[@AndjeiKuna]

The book was not that great either, was it?

[@mikaelnuutila6370]

Eragon is the worst movie i have ever seen. Totally destroyed any chance of sequels. Amazing book though

[@16m49x3]

Eragon might not have been the best book ever, but the author was like 16 when he wrote it. The 2nd and 3rd book becomes better and better. As he grows older. The movie is trash.

[@jon2431]

Well... I like the Count of Monte Cristo movie... :(

[@JMcMillen]

Which version of the movie? IMDB shows at least a dozen different movie versions along with a number of television ones as well. Odds are some of them are bad.

[@arrgghh1555]

Which one? There's about 5. Also the 1998 mini series is better then any of the movies.

[@jigokusagent]

I really liked the 2002 version! But, apparently, there are like 7 movie versions dating all the way back to 1934? So I suppose at least a few of them must have sucked!

[@edouarddubois9402]

I only saw the latest one (2002). I also liked it.

[@Classicaleducation99]

The video shows footage from the 1934 version

[@BobStein]

Goodness of book vs. movie may also be correlated with *whichever you saw first.* What you do becomes a part of what you are.

[@BobStein]

Nicolas Flamel - that correlation is _indeterminate_ if you always prefer books. It'll be interesting to study the first time you like a film better than a book. Do tell. Anyway my wording was too definite; I was wildly guessing there may be a correlation.

[@duckrutt]

I think that works with music as well. The first version of a song you hear sets the bar for other covers (or the original) It probably also sets your favorite Doctor which is why the best one is Tom Baker.

[@BobStein]

duckrutt - Yes, I wonder if that explains the persistence of Coke and McDonalds too. Is the first _really_ the best?

[@davidweihe6052]

Well, there is certainly a similar effect with what someone's first Bond, Captain in Star Trek, or Doctor in Dr Who is. People almost always like their first, most.

[@AnnaReed42]

@@duckrutt false. David Tennant was not my first Doctor, but he will forever be my favorite. I mean in general you're right, but not invariably.

[@DavidvanDeijk]

my favorite magic spell: Lorem Ipsem

[@HcmfWice]

And it's "it's", not "its". ;)

[@_____________________8736]

Oooof

[@AlexanderWeixelbaumer]

Romani ite domum!!!

[@Zestyclose-Big3127]

Laurelindo Likewise his correction of "Lorem Ipsem" isn't necessary. But hey it ended in all fun and banter so I see no reason to complain.

[@sirknight4981]

It's Leviosa not Leviosar!

[@seeingdragons4319]

Ok, stay with me here: wouldn't the relationship between the book and movie (the chart data) become skewed depending on how good the book was in the first place? Say you had a terrific movie based on a lackluster book. In this case, the movie team enhanced what should have been a mediocre movie into a blockbuster. But here's the rub: it was far easier for these guys because - with such low-hanging fruit - there was ample opportunity to improve on the content of the book. The end-result likely had little to do with the original manuscript. The filmmaker basically created something new but slapped on the book's title for credibility (or out of contract). This isn't the case wIth an exceptional book where there is far less 'dead area' for the movie makers to exploit. If the book is a masterpiece, these same filmmakers are dead in the water. With nothing novel to add, the only way they can go is downward. Then, of course, the movie will end up 'being worse than the book'.

[@kujmous]

Z Scores are my absolute favorite statistic! Unitless little values with so much value. It also helps that Hannah so completely knows how to convey complex systems in understandable, relatable concepts.

[@liquidgeorge]

As a sport scientist, I always z-score my athletes.

[@notgadot]

*favoUrite

[@McMxxCiV]

I absolutely loved this one. I love these "holy moly I never thought of it that way" moments, and this was possibly the best one so far this year. Wowzerz.

[@qwertyuiopaaaaaaa7]

This was such a great video. Fantastic job, Brady and Hannah!

[@MrMMertKorkmaz]

I'm so glad that I watched this video. This was one the most informative and eye opener Numberphile videos for me. Hospital example really made me get it. The subject was mind blowing. Thank you so much.

[@domc3040]

Just to be a pedant on something only tangentially relevant to the video.. Metacritic isn't a posher version of Rotten Tomatoes, they measure different things. RT gives the percentage of critics that gave a film a positive review, metacritic gives a mean score based on the rating the critics gave. ie, 90 on MC means critics on average thought the film was incredible, whereas 90% on RT means most critics though the film was at least okay. This isn't related at all, people misusing rotten tomatoes is just a pet peeve of mine! Interesting video otherwise!

[@jflartner117]

Yea, hopefully Walter Hickey used the user ratings of movies on Metacritic and not the critic mean score. Comparing a Metacritic critic score for a movie to a GoodReads score (user score) would not be a fair comparison.

[@Tyrentenir]

Rotten Tomatoes is like the electoral college of critic reviews.

[@alveolate]

hence, "posher". a pedant would need to define the meaning of "posher" first in order to discredit it.

[@starry_lis]

But then again RT gives you the only information you really need as a member of the audience: is it worth seeing?

[@1992WLK]

@@starry_lis not all people value a movie the same though. Therefore sometimes the majority may say its not worth seeing even though you may actually value what the film offers.

[@DanTheStripe]

"You're not going to date anyone who isn't attractive or nice enough" Well, when you're running out of options...

[@tabularasa0606]

Then you stop dating. It's too much work anyway.

[@theuserofthissite]

sounds like someone is spending their efforts on the "out of your league" triangle

[@billsemenoff]

Also, attractive is prima facile evident and pretty conclusive, whereas niceness isn’t borne out until the actual date. Not a a reason to avoid the juicy topic, just saying it’s not an example of sampling bias.

[@Dorian_sapiens]

"Attractive" and "nice" are both relative to the quality of options you have available.

[@hireahitCA]

Bill Semenoff, the sampling happens due to the availability of individuals to date in the first place.

[@grivar]

0:23 Ah yes, the world-famous Lorem Ipsum spell.

[@grapheist612]

I think a lot of it also has to do with a person's expectations. I tend to read more non-fiction than fiction, so on several occasions, I've watched the movie first and read the book later. This includes the examples of "bad" movies given; The Hitchhiker's Guide and the 2002 version of The Count of Monte Cristo. Each of those movies, if you did not expect them to be carbon copies of their source materials, were good (in my opinion, of course). I still enjoy both of them greatly, even after reading their books. Looking back on them now, they fixed many of the problems that the books presented to their being made into movies (i.e., Hitchhiker's Guide needing a clear, concise plot that would fit into two hours). I think that if you read the book first, you don't judge a movie as a movie, you judge the movie as a book. So yeah, The Count of Monte Cristo, coming in at ~2 hours film length, would be a soul-less summary of the twelve-hour-to-read abridged-version book, unless the filmmakers cut out some things to really develop the crucial storyline; namely friendship-betrayal-revenge-redemption. On the flipside, you can get filmmakers trying to remain too true to the books and making a bad movie, Deathly Hallows Pt. 1 being a good example of this. DHP1 additionally has the problem of being a film without much of a climax because it's the first of two parts. Still, if the filmmakers had been willing to stray a little more from the source text, they could have amped up the climax at the Malfoy's house and made a much better stand-alone movie, instead of just a first part to a longer movie. I have taken this insight to heart. In general, if I haven't read the book before the movie starts being made, I won't until after I've seen it. In this way, I get to enjoy the movie (assuming it's a good movie) and then I get to enjoy the book (assuming it's a good book). I recommend this approach to anybody that likes movies and likes books.

[@zachtayloriv]

I enjoyed this video, but I think The Martian is a bad example of an "ok book." That book has a 4.4 rating on Goodreads, with 340,000+ 5-star ratings. I personally liked the movie but loved the book--it's probably a better example of a very good book and a very good movie. For movies significantly better than the book, there are a lot of good examples: Jaws, Die Hard, or Dr. Strangelove--maybe The Fantastic Mr. Fox. But not The Martian.

[@J0R1AN]

Zach Taylor how were you here 42 minutes ago...

[@tippybooch]

Fight Club definitely goes on that list for me. I love the film but I thought the book was just awful, it made me wonder how it even got adapted to film in the first place.

[@Nippontradamus]

Even any of Roald Dahl's creations

[@hedgemonkey6]

Thought the exact same thing, especially when the book had LOTS more maths in it than the film did, it's was one of the main reasons I preferred the book and didn't expect it from a maths based channel.

[@diddykong5241]

Also, Deathly Hallows was a TERRIBLE book. And especially if you're gonna talk about Part One and compare it to the first half of the book where literally nothing of interest happens and all 3 protagonists are bitching at each other because they got cryptic and confusing instructions and have no idea what to do....Yuck.

[@pleasedontwatchthese9593]

I this this video will change the way I think about things and rate then in my head. This is good to know.

[@Dorian_sapiens]

It really is a useful corrective for one of the cognitive biases that affect the way we assess the world.

[@saumitjin5526]

Really is

[@philcorrigan5641]

This is why everyone ought to be taught basic statistics in school. It really is the most useful area of maths in terms of real world everyday applications. Far more so than, say, geometry

[@akowalz]

This is an awesome video about a fascinating and totally new concept. Thanks for sharing and thank you for the great explanation!

[@aritradasgupta4461]

I feel like I just wait for Numberphile to upload another video to inspire me to study.I love all their videos and have bought so many books based on what they mention.Keep uploading and inspiring sirs.

[@camerondrew9402]

You’re top right corner all day!

[@camilohiche4475]

aka out of your league

[@ryanbell6672]

We can all go home, C S won the internet

[@BigBossHuntelaar]

Incredibly well explained and good to know!

[@ThomasRStevenson]

I learned so much with this video. Thank you so much!

[@rioga98]

Great video, both very entertaining and informative. Numberphile is definitely "top-right" graph material!

[@Skip6235]

Me: "Oh boy! A Hannah video! I love her! She's one of my favorites!" Hannah: "The Martian is only an okay book" Me: "YOU'RE DEAD TO ME!" (jk, awesome video Brady and Hannah! I will go pick up her new book on Audible right now!)

[@dom_worth]

i thought the exact same thing and ran to the comments to find other Martian book defenders 😂

[@oz_jones]

The book is atrocious.

[@Nimasho2go]

Note to self: Never let Hannah pick a movie... seriously. You think nobody's seen the Count of Monte Cristo? That movie is a classic (and the book was great too, imo).

[@Lexivor]

The Count of Monte Cristo has been made into a movie at least four times. I wonder if people are thinking of different versions.

[@laughingman7882]

How did you manage to read it?

[@laughingman7882]

Conchita Mendez that's actually impressive... i couldn't get through the audio book without getting lost in character names

[@pindakaas42]

amazing, I love this kind of stuff, because it actually teaches us about basically any kind of topic in the real world.

[@nickway_]

Please include the name of the theorem, paradox, etc in the title of description, so we can search for it later. Love the videos, thanks for the lesson. Much appreciated.

[@gsmith2000994]

"Alright diabetes" 😂

[@constantinedejong9025]

This was an interesting paradox! However, I think that it could be improved, because the video was talking about the correlation of people hearing about the movie/book, I don't think that the final graphs formed a compelling argument, as it literally shows the opposite of what the video was about. I think Hollywood and books aren't the best example to explain this paradox because this paradox only applies when there actually isn't a correlation between the two. In my opinion there is a positive correlation between the quality of the book and movie because the quality of the book can definitely affect the movie with the plot of the story or the funding it gets (which is not assumed in the video). The toenails and diabetes explains it better, as there is, to my knowledge at least, no correlation between the two (correct me if I'm wrong).

[@emperortgp2424]

Constantine de Jong Actually having diabetes increases the risk of getting a particular fungal infection that affects toenails.

[@wmichaelbooth]

Well, the video starts by making some observations about the quality of movie adaptations. It uses that as a jumping off point to talk about this sampling paradox, then it circles back around to answer the questions it raised about movie adaptations and to prove out that what we were actually seeing was in fact a sampling bias and not the negative correlation we perceived. As for diabetes, diabetics do tend to have foot problems because they'll commonly have some neuropathy that prevents them from realizing injuries to their feet, which can result in infections, which can ultimately result in amputations. The ingrown toenails and diabetes comparison is a little off-putting because a bad ingrown toenail is something a diabetic would have to take very seriously. The example is meant to show that there's no negative correlation between these things, which is absolutely true. You'd likely expect the opposite; the people with the worst diabetes are more likely to have issues with their feet, including, but not limited to, infected ingrown toenails.

[@ugluwuglu]

Super interesting video... I'm quite surprised that i cannot recall ever hearing about Berkson's paradox before.

[@cfytcf]

11:02 if you want to hear a segue smoother than oil on glass.

[@teisanumihai1181]

The count of Monte Cristo wasn't a bad film anyway! But there were many movies inspired by the book, it depends on which you watched to. And the large variety of coordonates for the points shows that is not a really dependence between Hollywood and the books themselves. I also like the idea of analyzing with math things that, at a first view, would never pair with it.

[@thegamer97HS]

Monte Cristo was indeed an amazing movie, Hannah's taste a bit off. I mean no one is perfect lol.

[@TheManInRoomFive]

I liked the Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy movie, maybe I am the only one :/

[@awzome8888]

Everybody I know likes the Hitchhiker's Guide movie. There's just something seriously wrong with this lady.

[@Enkiev666]

Read the books and you'll know :)

[@Bronzescorpion]

Just because the book is better doesn't make the movie bad. I quite enjoyed both.

[@VikingSchism]

The film was great, and the book was great - the quality of one doesn't affect the quality of the other Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy is very different in each medium it was adapted to, so comparing them all is tough

[@ilanouh]

I saw the movie before reading the books. Loved the movie, still do, but I can understand why the movie can be disliked (it's basically a weird mashup of all books)

[@MrRudale]

I had a go at simulating this in Matlab and it actually gives a positive correlation between the two variables. I generated random numbers for two variables between 0-1 and data points containing smaller values were more likely to be randomly removed. So what exactly is the selection process that causes a negative correlation? This is the script: n = 1e4; % How many data points. d = rand(n,2); % Generate uncorrelated data. r = rand(n, 2); d(find(sum(repmat(max(r')', 1, 2) > d, 2)>0), :) = []; % Remove data with small values with larger probability. scatter(d(:,1), d(:,2)); corr(d(:,1), d(:,2)) % Show correlation.

[@23inhouse]

That segue into the advert was flawless!

[@xenontesla122]

I wish the Z-score (or standard score) were explained more. It's a really useful tool that I think could be used in things like voting systems.

[@rickvs222]

Are there any other factors as well? Movies generally have to condense a whole book into 1.5 to 2 hours. Could it be that more often than not this reduces the quality of the story and characters more than a movie can increase the enjoyment of the experience.

[@benuscore8780]

Yeah, but the old saying "A picture is worth a thousand words" very much holds true in filmmaking. Books explain the appearance of everything in detail, whereas the movie just shows what it looks like without having to deadicate time to describing it.

[@jamesknapp64]

That certainly is a reason why even splint onto 2 movies the Deathly Hallows struggles, there was still a lot of content cut. Another example in the opposite way is the Shawshank Redemption is a short story so the movie expands on the book so much that it may be the biggest movie > book example

[@camilohiche4475]

It depends. If people evaluate the movie based on how well it adapted the book, then I guess this could be a factor. But in general movie critics judge the quality of a film by its own merits, regardless of how well it implemented the source material.

[@billsemenoff]

Ben_ , true that movies have that potential, but film is an inherently more difficult media owing to its higher dimensionality, and more expensive, so movie makers are going to fall short of the expectations created by a well written book. Hanna’s the best!

[@rmsgrey]

Generally speaking, and this does vary depending on the story, a movie is about the length of a novella. It's true that a movie can show details in passing that would take many words to describe in a book, but it's also true that few of those words would actually make it past a decent editor. And, while movies have the advantage when it comes to visual detail, books have the advantage when it comes to the passage of time - "it rained for three days" is only five words, but showing it in a movie would either require a montage, or for a character to comment on how long it's been raining. And when it comes to expressing a character's internal thoughts and motivations, an author can just tell you what's on their mind, while a movie has to either get the actor to convey the thoughts through facial expression, body language, and other non-verbal cues, or get them to verbalise them... So, yeah, rule of thumb is that a standard 2 hour movie is about the same length as a novella.

[@SupaHotFjalla]

Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy is probably my favourite film ever, and HP 7 part 1 is probably my fave from the series… 😀

[@Kryoclasm]

Always enjoy the videos with Hanna.

[@Gathanokos]

Im sry numberphile i havent been watching your videos for a while but Hannah Fry just made me come back XD

[@BruceMagnus]

That's weird. Hannah Fry usually makes people come forward

[@fishypaw]

I find Hannah very attractive and she seems like a nice person, which means she is in the top right of the graph and hence out of my league. Ho hum, can't argue with the maths. :(

[@Psychodegu]

But that voice.

[@Biomirth]

Doing the math ahead of time can at least save one a lot of anguish in this area :)

[@OrchestrationOnline]

That's called a "sultry alto."

[@anirudhsilai5790]

I love how you analyze the most mundane things like this

[@Ny0s]

I was surprised when I saw a video with this title on such a channel,so I clicked on it by curiosity without excepting anything in particular. I am greatly surprised, this was actually very interesting. Thank you for this view on the matter.

[@epliroforiki]

Amazing explanation of many real situations.

[@croissantsforthought8502]

1:58 idk, The Fifty Shades Of Grey Trilogy are the worst books and movies, yet they are still in everyone's subconsciousness.

[@kruksog]

Long term though... in 50 to 100 years, I doubt it will be in the public consciousness.

[@Danilego]

I literally watched the Crash Course episode about this yesterday(I mean, the Statistics episode about cause and correlation)

[@OppOverHyp]

Always a fan of the Hannah episodes, host of my favourite podcast

[@TheRealHelvetica]

There’s a simple way to refute the whole “the book was better” argument. *Fight Club*

[@9308323]

But you're not supposed to mention it.

[@the6p4c]

I feel like trying to call diabetes and foot problems unconnected is definitely wrong in practice :)

[@aviateur57]

well they're not negatively connected

[@tomasxfranco]

Maybe when you don't have toes it's hard to have bad toenails...

[@cariad123]

True. Even ignoring ulcers and whatnot, the circulation issues mean their toenails are often quite bad unless they're amazing at sticking exactly to their treatment plans and all that stuff.

[@glmathgrant]

In the immortal words of Captain Novolin, “Check you [sic] feet”!

[@Spiros219]

-hey how is your diabetes -its alright. I have an alright diabetes

[@mazmaaz]

audiobook doesn't seem to sell in the US...

[@grivar]

Yes.

[@stephenchen2993]

Agreed.

[@NikozBG]

Exactly

[@mijkolsmith]

Apparently not according to the video. Not on purpose anyway

[@grivar]

@@mijkolsmith not on purpose, and not all of them. But the answer is still yes.

[@shacharh5470]

"Very bad books never get made into films" ? That's simply wrong. e.g. 50 Shades..

[@jiffylou98]

it's statistics. Plenty of *_notable_* exceptions

[@fabled.]

Also 50 shades appeals to an entirely different audience, which like it or not is the majority. In their eyes it's an amazing book.

[@VideoDotGoogleDotCom]

The whole Harry Potter series, too.

[@argh1989]

Oh no, you didn't!

[@KrzysiuNet]

It is an amazing book. The only one I would use to fix uneven legs of chair. But seriously: FabledDan has a point and it should be point of most comments here - "smart" critics says the book is horrible, but many people love it - well, let them whip! I mean... Let them be! Individual taste matters. Lately sometimes the taste is shaped by critics opinion, which is quite pathological, tho :(

[@TyrantJD]

I love loading up "The Mathematics of Love" and listen to it on the train. Waiting to get paid to buy Hello World, but I love Hannah's books. Such fun reads. They need to make a movie based off them!

[@alephnull4044]

Very nice explanation of an interesting phenomenon that I'd never heard of before.

[@scsteeldrums]

Diabetics actually commonly do have poor toenails, so I think it’s a bad example. Diabetes often causes numbness in the feet due to peripheral artery disease and/or sciatica. People who can’t feel their feet don’t take as good care of them.

[@grivar]

So the real question is when we are getting a movie based on Hannah's book. And how good it will be.

[@ZoggFromBetelgeuse]

You might generalise this principle in n > 2 dimensions, like the "pick n-1" sayings. Examples: - "Attractive, smart, emotionally stable - pick two" - "Technologically advanced, enlightened, open to off world visitors - pick two" - "Elegant, hyperspace-capable, inexpensive, reliable, large cargo hold for abducting cows - pick four" (sounds way catchier in Aldebaranian) - "Inhabitable, near your star system, mineral-rich, unregulated - pick three"

[@Theo_Caro]

Hello World is definitely going on my wishlist! I could listen to Hannah for hours, and now I guess I will!

[@quahntasy]

First time I've ever heard anyone suggest the Martian movie was better than the book. But I do agree with the harry potter books.The books were waaaaaaaay better than the movie.

[@jsmith5052]

Movie took out the most socially awkward parts from the book and it was still cringy. Still entertaining to read/watch.

[@Lexivor]

Really? I've heard several people say the book was awful. Seems like people either like the book or hate it.

[@auto_ego]

This video is my introduction to the idea that there are people who read The Martian and didn't completely love it. I thought it was universal, at least among anyone who likes science, which is basically my entire crowd.

[@drearyplane8259]

Yeah I preferred the book but I can see why people who went movie-book wouldn't like it so much.

[@pmcgee003]

FAR. BETTER. BOOK. 👍👍

[@egilsandnes9637]

It's a very interresting phenomenon. That said, I think the book/movie problem is a lot more complex. As she metioned you wouldn't finish a big book that's bad. If the book is good though, you might consider watching the movie. It's not a big investment in time to do so, even if the movie is not as good as the book. If you don't read a lot of books, or maybe are a slow reader, you wouldn't invest time reading the book after watching the movie. Amongst other reasons, you know how everyting ends. I actually think books kind of by default are better than movies. They will force you to imagine things, to invest in the story. You will spend a lot more time in that universe. You will have a lot more details.

[@jiffylou98]

so you're more likely to like a book after reading it than a movie because of various reasons (proportional time validation, effort required per medium, average critical capacity of the producer/consumer, etc.) but then could you scale the axes to correct for that?

[@DusanPavlicek78]

The animations are great and funny and everything, I like them a lot but with a video like this one, I don't mind seeing plenty of Hannah, you don't need to cut away so often ;) :D

[@JohnEthan777]

Would really appreciate if the mathematical concept was included in the video title- since it normally is, I don't know if it was skipped here, but it always helps make the videos easier to comeback to when sharing resources on this particular topic. A minor gripe of course.

[@KutuluMike]

Hannah: "Books that are really bad don't even get made into films." Me: "Twilight"

[@tibortresla]

For me Hannah is in the top right portion of the Attractiveness / Niceness graph.

[@richhays9373]

Where do I find the list/chart of the movies shown at the end?

[@MindlessWanderings]

Doesn't the question require a minimum standard of sorts? Can you ruin a bad book? If a book must meet a certain level of goodness, or at least popularity, to be considered movie worthy and ruinable then don't we need to be selective with the statistics? If a bad book becomes a bad movie = Not ruined Bad book becomes a good movie = Not ruined Good book becomes a good movie = Not ruined Good book becomes a bad movie = Ruined If bad books can't be ruined, then shouldn't we be looking primarily at good books? If good books are evenly distributed along movie quality then, by definition, most good books are ruined. A good book has a good score (say 7/10 and above), a Not ruined book requires that the movie gets a similar or better score. Everything below that is either ruined or just not an improvement. Aren't we then required to look at that top right sector on the graph and say "Those are the movies that did NOT ruin the book, therefore, everything outside has been ruined" If Ruined > Not Ruined, then Hollywood does ruin books.

[@azermanus]

Whoa, whoa there, Dr. Fry. Deathly Hallows pt. 1 is absolutely brilliant. Now pt. 2 on the other hand...

[@Jman3teen]

*Stares at Hannah longingly* "Probably not going to want to go out with you" :( I know

[@JehuMcSpooran]

What I love about graphs and averages is how you can skew the data to show what you want. That graph about meanness vs attractiveness was somehow changed to niceness vs attractiveness. Stick super nice at 0 and complete A-hole at the top of the Y axis and the graph would look completely different.

[@N.I.R.A.T.I.A.S.]

Up in the top right corner of the Good Movie/Good Book plot is The Shawshank Redemption.

[@tavinorigami]

Where does this 500-500 number work?

[@X_Baron]

Yeah, sounds weird to give a local phone number to a global audience.

[@serger_]

Tavin's Origami Instructions The answer is nothing

[@LamaPoop]

I'm still sad about how they screwed up "Northern Lights".

[@ikchess]

That film doesn't exist. It's not a thing. Why would any sane person go to Svalbard before Bolvangar? They wouldn't. Grrrrrr.

[@MrJonnyk000]

Hey Brady, I went to Audible to look into Hello World and it doesn't seem to be available yet. Did Hannah give you a release date? [my apologies if I'm incorrect]

[@carolynr570]

My professor discussed this yesterday and I just happened to stumble upon this video

[@rafeeshahin]

Hmmm... I wouldn't say Metacritic is a posher RT, but rather a more reliable source than RT? Does posher necessarily mean more reliable? Not sure as I've never used it in such context.

[@jesusnthedaisychain]

Deathly Hallows: Part 1 was great. It followed the book almost perfectly. Part 2, on the other hand...

[@DanButOnline]

Captain Matticus Agreed. In general the books were probably better than the films, but Deathly Hallows Part 1 was fantastic. I’d actually say it was the second best movie of the series in filmmaking terms, after Prisoner of Azkaban. But maybe that’s just me.

[@felixccaa]

what is the mathematical difference between which one was consumed first? I for myself made the observation, if I watch a movie first then read a book, most often I enjoy both, whereas if I read the book first then watch the movie very often I do not like the movie. My thoughts why this could be the case: well reading a book, makes me create my inner movie - a real moviemaker will almost never be able to match those images. The other way around I get images, which I carry with me - when I read the book afterwards I will get surprised about parts that had to be left out from the book.

[@AutoFirePad]

Wow Hannah! What a voice for audiobooks!

[@mattym8038]

Can we substitute "Goodness" for "Quality" since that sounds less, after school special.

[@samuelpierce9962]

Glad to know I'm not the only one who was thinking this! Haha

[@connorp3030]

Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy film is quiet good :(

[@simatbirch]

connorp3030 it’s loudly bad

[@enau--4600]

I disagree very strongly

[@trustnoone81]

What are the summary statistics for the regression at 10:18?

[@GrandblueSkies]

Count of Monte Cristo with Jim Cavizel is amazing btw

[@Henri-email-archive]

5:35 DEMONETISED

[@stv3qbhxjnmmqbw835]

Very beautiful person are ARSEHOLES 😂

[@MrRasmus2909]

The shining is the only one that is a 10/10 book AND a 10/10 movie fight me (or give me better examples i need stuff to read/watch)

[@EngineerWhen]

The Lord of the Rings ;) (No need for further explaination)

[@jamesknapp64]

@@EngineerWhen I dont like the books but love many works by authors inspired by them. To each their own.

[@igNights77]

Rasmus Bertelsen Fight you? ... well how about Fight Club ? ^^

[@bockmaker]

The Right Stuff

[@BBel-xb8zu]

A clockwork orange too

[@erictaylor5462]

I have read two books where I thought the movie was better. "What Dreams May Come" and "Field of Dreams" I think I have a bit of an advantage though. I think in pictures (which I did not know wasn't normal until recently) and when I read a book I can "see" what is taking place as if it were a movie.

[@gbtest85]

Great video, can you make more examples of these type of correlations?