Recently, our class read the book and watched the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey. The book is written by Arthur C. Clarke and the movie was directed by Stanley Kubrick. The book was written as a framework for the movie, so the two are mostly the same. But, while there were similarities, there were also some major differences.
The story started with pre-historic ‘humans’ called man-apes. The man-apes were very primitive and on the brink of survival. One day, a huge monolith showed up and started messing with their minds and teaching them new concepts. In the book, each of the man-apes became ‘possessed’ by the monolith and forced to try new things, like tying knots and throwing rocks. Moon-Watcher was one of the chosen ones because he learned quickly, so the monolith continued to work with him until he made his entire pack of man-apes function better. Once Moon-Watcher learned how to kill other animals for food, his entire species was saved from extinction, and could now evolve into the humans we are today.
In the movie, the monolith showed up next to the man-apes and didn’t interact with them at all. Moon-Watcher was showed killing a creature, but there was nothing leading up to that moment. Though both ended with the same result, I prefer the book’s version of this spectacle better because it gave more details. The movie was very confusing and hard to keep up with because it jumped around so quickly. I also think it would have been more entertaining as an audience member if Stanley Kubrick could have made the man-apes possessed.
The initial destination of Discovery is another major difference between the book and the movie of 2001: A Space Odyssey. In the book, Bowman and Poole both think that they are going to S...
... middle of paper ...
...eal food to eat and other drinks besides water. I definitely preferred the books portrayal of the food because it would have been so interesting to see someone eating blue goo.
Overall I am glad that I read 2001: A Space Odyssey before I watched the movie. Both were very well made, though the movie would have been terribly confusing without the book as a guide. As opposed to choosing one or the other as my favorite, I think the two complement each other very nicely. The ending wasn’t exactly satisfying, though it left a conclusion up to the creative mind of the audience, which could definitely be taken advantage of. After reading this book, us as humans should feel humbled in knowing that we might not be as great as we think we are. Stories like this one should also encourage us to travel through space so we can find out what the meaning of life really is.
In the first 20 minutes of 2001: A Space Odyssey you see a group of monkeys going through evolution. The first change you see is that of a leader. In the beginning, each monkey did their own thing, and was not bound to any organization whatsoever. The monkeys did what they want when they wanted. Then the change begins. A single monkey, by himself, rises to the top of a cliff. He stands and screams. The other monkeys notice him screaming and began dancing and rejoicing. They scream and jump around, in what appears to be reverence for their new leader. Stanley Kubrick shows the change very simply, yet its message is still very clear. The monkeys had never shouted as loud or danced as much as they had previously in the film. Their actions confirm that something in fact had changed.
These two films come from entirely different genres, have entirely different plots, and are even based in entirely different galaxies, but the share the theme of the hero’s journey. This concept can be equally applied to nearly every book, movie, and other such works, as long as you dig under the surface and find the meaning beneath. The elements of the hero’s journey are found in both films, and with a critical eye, can be found all around us. This is the classic story of the hero; in every shape and form an author can apply it too.
When it comes to both stories, they both provide questions that leave us to ponder. While they have their similarities, the majority of ideas differ. The story lines differ in so many ways that they are two different stories with a few similarities that tie them together. Although I enjoyed watching the movie, I still find that I prefer the question that the original story left us wondering. What did happen to Ichabod Crane? Personally? I think he ran away.
...d coloring of certain images. The novel, however, puts much greater emphasis on the imagination and creativity, and on the main character Tita. The novel really makes the reader feel Titas pain and grow with her as she discovers her freedom, whereas the movie failed to achieve this. Moreover, the movie tends to ignore the significant of 3 integral motifs, cooking, tears and sensuality.
There are usually differences in two different versions of something. This can often be seen when a book is made into a movie. There are many similarities and differences in the book and movie versions of To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee.
Both Collins and Ross did a remarkable job in creating a sensational science fiction story that captivates its readers and viewers. I feel it is uncommon to find a film that portrays the aspects of a novel this consistently, and while there were a few differences I feel the film does an exceptional job of encompassing the vision of this book.
In both, the aliens invade without warning and destroy everything with their superior technology. People know about the aliens before they arrive ahead of time in each story, but do nothing because of denial and public hysteria. The study and autopsy of aliens are described in the two articles. There are differences though, though. There are no heroes in the book, but in the movie there are.
In both the novel and movie focus on the war. The war influences the characters to enroll.Also, the main setting is at the Devon School. However, in the novel Gene visits Leper at his house but in the movie Leper lives in the woods.In the novel Gene is coming back to the Devon School 15 years later.However, in the book he is coming to Devon as a new student.Therefore, similarities and differences exist in time and setting in the novel and the movie.In the novel and the movie there are similarities and differences in events, character, and time and setting.
Ethan cai Dr.Friedman Us history Oct 06 Wizard of Oz:difference between the book and movie The Wizard of Oz was a story happened in the girl Dorothy’s dream. The girl Dorothy lived with her Uncle Henry and Aunt Em in a farm in Kansas. One day, after a strong cyclone, Dorothy found that she was at a very special place where she had never been before. The crazy cyclone brought Dorothy and her little dog Toto to a place named Munchkins.
I read the book The Outsiders and watched the movie the West Side Story, they had many similarities but they also had their differences. I enjoyed both the book and the movie they were very well written. I will tell compare and contrast the book and the movie.
In conclusion, details involving the characters and symbolic meanings to objects are the factors that make the novel better than the movie. Leaving out aspects of the novel limits the viewer’s appreciation for the story. One may favor the film over the novel or vice versa, but that person will not overlook the intense work that went into the making of both. The film and novel have their similarities and differences, but both effectively communicate their meaning to the public.
The movie The Kite Runner is based on the book and it contains both subtle and explicit differences as all books and movies do. Both the book and the movie have very compelling and moralistic themes though at times the movie’s themes seem limited. The themes presented throughout the movie and the book are penance, loyalty, prejudice, religion and growing up. The characterization, overall plot of the movie and the setting of the book seem to be consistent with each other though at times they both may vary both slightly and drastically.
The biggest connection between the movie and the books are the leading characters like Dr. Susan Calvin and Dr. Alfred Lanning. The “I, Robot” book is a complete history of robots told through Dr. Calvin’s eyes, and the movie is just a part of this huge history. Although the plot of the movie isn’t a part of the book, it surely speaks the words and ideas of Isaac Asimov. And I think that if he were alive, he would very much appreciate the movie and his acknowledgment and respect in the world of robotics.
The book and the movie were both very good. The book took time to explain things like setting, people’s emotions, people’s traits, and important background information. There was no time for these explanations the movie. The book, however, had parts in the beginning where some readers could become flustered.
"Books and movies are like apple and oranges. They both are fruit, but taste completely different.” said Stephen King (goodreads.com). It is indeed true, books and movies have several common things and yet have differences. They both give us the same story, but are viewed completely different. Reading books and watching movies are similar as they both tell a story and give details and information about the story. Reading books or watching movies gives the reader and the viewer the same feeling and emotions about the story. People can feel gloomy or pleased with the story after reading a book or watching a movie. Both books and movies have the same general concepts, which are the themes and main characters of