Movie Novel Tie Ins: Do You Like Them or Not?

[Amy Darvill]

Note: I'm not talking about books that were turned into movies or television shows. I'm talking about the movie or show or play being turned into a novel, usually at the same time or shortly after the movie is coming out.

I just recently wrote a book review for West Side story and I've read most of the Star Wars novelizations, as well as Doctor Who. And I have noticed something. It's totally anecdotal, not a scientist or researcher here, but I feel like the books written for earlier media, say 60's or 70's, are varying levels of following the beat of the film to a letter. Some of the Doctor Who ones are almost the script basically. Better ones do try to do a bit more development, but they are pretty short and pacing ends up wonky. (Star Wars: Return of the Jedi is actually kind of memorable because it was written before George Lucas finalized some things so like Obi-Wan is Uncle Owen's brother in the book, not the film, and a few other details that just kind of throws you off.)

Later books, I'm thinking of specifically Star Wars Prequel novelizations, are for lack of better terms, legitimate books. Yes, they follow the plot of the movie, but they are so much more detailed and generally written much stronger. At least, in my opinion, they are.

So my question is, do you read the tie-in novels for media like that? Do you think they can or should be treated as a separate media or not? Do you even like them? (I do, when they are good. Some of the Doctor Who early novelizations were a total headache to read, especially as an ebook that messed up the formatting.)