Ok, ok. I agree making that statement into a question was just stupid. However, I have to wonder just what people mean. Are they trying to compare the two art forms?
Its true, when you compare the book with the movie, the book will always be better. It is inevitable. You see, a movie cannot fit most of what the book has in it. So really a movie is more like a summary of things that somebody might highlight. Why should a summary be blamed for not being able to hold everything that the full work can, and does?
See, if you want to experience the full amazingness of something, then READ THE BOOK! Movies are something more to enjoy. They are like intricate visual book summaries. Its unfair to the book and movie to compare the two very different art forms.
What people need to learn is to separate themselves from the book that a movie may be based off of, because if you don't... well you won't ever truly enjoy a movie that is based off of a book.
People need to stop asking for better movies, cause the fact is that nobody wants to watch a 13 hour movie. It wouldn't work for theaters, and it would take years longer for movies to come out. Plus, acting and scene quality are the things you should be looking at. Not how much of your favorite characters relationship the movie is showing. You gotta give directors a break. Enjoy the movie for what it is. Embrace it, or just don't bother even watching it.
That said. I wish they had made Lightening thief into a better movie... but I mostly have a problem with the acting. They choose to cut out the wrong characters, and they choose a weird cast. It was a terrible movie. Even worse when you compare it to the book.
But in general, I advise all you peoples who read books and then watch the movies... separate them! Don't compare movies to books. It is just a straight path to pure disappointment.
The book is always better then the movie, but just stop comparing them.