Reading books keeps a person's mind active, whereas watching films and television is passive and does not require a person to use their imagination. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?

As ways of spending time had progressed there appeared much controversy about its pros and cons. There are a plethora of people who tend to believe that these are books that boost fantasy up, but not TV or movies, which, according to them, do not activate it at all - while some members of society, as well as I,

on the other hand

, take the opposite opinion. Below I will

further

explore

this

highly interesting and thought-provoking dilemma. Personally, I do frown on the idea that only reading develops imagination, while both films and teleprogrammes keep it passive. The primer reason is that editions and publications vary and if it is,

for example

, science fiction, it probably will influence positively on creative power.

However

, the more formal book, the less fantasy it includes, the same concept is applied to both projects of cinema or televisions.

For instance

, in Russia on the 5th ,channel it goes

such

a series as "Trace" or the so-called "Sled" in the Russian language. Its scenario remains detective stories, where a person can advance in not only imagination but

also

acumen. The secondary reason, due to the presence of special effects and music, any member of society can underline something extraordinary, whatever that he or she has not seen before. As an

,

Remove the comma

apply

show examples

example I would like to stress the film "LVX Aetern" that ,thanks to its plot and effects, recreate the atmosphere of epilepsy.

This

can be hardly done through some texts. To sum up, I totally agree for 100 per cent that films, as well as TV programmes, do improve human inventiveness.

This

happens because of both formalities of the genre and the existence of additional elements.