Can Movies Build Empathy Like Books Can? Let’s Settle This.

Stories make us more human. But does it matter if they come in hardcover or high-def?

Ari Kohen

, HIP’s president, thinks we have an ongoing argument about whether books or movies are better for building empathy. He says it’s definitely books. I agree with him. And also don’t. I think each has its own strengths and so I got to work on a piece that will definitely convince him.

Probably.

My starting point is to use Star Wars against him. He’s a sucker for Star Wars, so let’s roll out Harrison Ford.

An interview on Instagram this week had Han Solo sharing this view on film makers:

“Tom Hardy calls us Facemakers. What we offer people with these stories in essence is emotional exercise - a place to go to exercise your emotions. In the dark. In a movie theatre. With strangers and good music and all of that. What we’re bringing is the potential for a constructed exercise program. The exercises are empathy and understanding.”

I think that probably is enough ammunition to have convinced Ari, but I want to keep going.

Screen stories (movies, TV, even video games) can stir emotion, shift perspective, and build empathy. The science backs this up. A powerful narrative on screen activates the same empathy-related brain regions as a book. The crew’s realisation of the years they’ve lost in Interstellar activates the tear ducts immediately. Keira Knightley’s face when James McAvoy is taken away in Atonement can punch you in the chest. A tremble in Andrew Garfield’s voice in The Social Network can knock you off-centre. These stories move us because they show us. They lean into emotion through sound, colour, face, and music.

We’d be remiss not to talk about quality.

Not all movies are equal. My friend Dave has never seen a movie he didn’t like. To him, Portrait of a Lady on Fire is just as good as the Minecraft Movie. For normal people, a quality film engages us emotionally more than the latest big studio, big budget extravaganza.

Just as a diet of McDonalds doesn’t make for a healthy President, a steady stream of shallow, formulaic stories won’t do much for empathy. Whether you’re reading or watching, depth matters. Character complexity matters. Narrative ambiguity matters. Execution of the craft matters. The stories that leave you with questions, that force you to feel discomfort, that stay with you for days - they’re the ones that build empathy.

But the question isn’t whether screen stories can foster empathy. It’s whether they do so as well as books. And that’s where the lines begin to sharpen.

The research says books do more. Not because they’re longer, or fancier, or smell like childhood. But because they demand more of us. And that demand is the point.

When you read, your brain is doing a kind of theatre. You are the casting director, the costume designer, the foley artist, and the lighting crew. That’s why you’re disappointed when your favourite book is turned into a movie and they cast Ben Affleck. You don’t just see the story in a book - you build it. And that construction, that mental rehearsal, is training for empathy.

In reading, you have to imagine how someone feels. You have to step into their mind, not just their shoes. You don’t get Claire Danes’ trembling lip or a John Williams score to cue your feelings. You get context, intention, contradiction. You get access to thought. Sometimes messy, conflicted thought. Something it’s hard for film to deliver.

And this work you need to do makes the effects of the story last longer than when the story is fed to you. Even by skilled artisans.

So, where does that leave stories on the silver screen or the black mirror? They’re emotionally potent. No doubt. But they come with shortcuts. You’re given the tears, the tone, the tension. You receive the emotion; you don’t always have to construct it. That means you might feel deeply, but not always engage cognitively in the same way.

Now, is that always bad? No. A great film can absolutely build affective empathy - emotional resonance. That moment where your eyes sting because someone else is hurting on screen? That’s real. But emotional empathy alone doesn’t exercise the full empathic muscle (sorry Harrison). It can stir compassion, sure, but it might not stretch your ability to understand complex perspectives. Particularly when they differ from your own.

And that’s the key difference. Reading fiction asks you to work. To bridge the gap. To sit with uncertainty. To infer. To pause and reflect. That cognitive-emotional double-play is what makes reading such a reliable empathy gym.

So, if you want to feel something powerful, watch a great movie. The Great Beauty rather than The Great Wall.

But if you want to grow - if you want to become someone who sees others more clearly, understands difference more deeply, and builds the reflex to care when it counts - read.

Not just anything, obviously. Not just books that echo your own life. Not ice-hockey romance. Get yourself some stories that take you into someone else’s mind. Find characters with a different background, a different belief system, a different grief.

This isn’t gatekeeping (though I am happy to gatekeep if you need help). It’s scaffolding.

Because the goal here isn’t to win points in a debate. It’s to raise the stakes. To ask how do we train for empathy in a world that desperately needs more of it?

Here’s the verdict:

Screen stories can open the door.

Books help you walk through it.

Ari wins.

~ Matt

P.S. I will leave audiobooks, graphic novels, songs, and poetry for you to argue about in the comments.