Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The martian chronicles ray bradbury shmoop
Hollywood vs history
The martian chronicles ray bradbury essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The martian chronicles ray bradbury shmoop
Today, we know quite a bit about Mars. Nasa recently found water, we know its dimensions, and we haven’t found any signs of life. However, in 1950, we knew significantly less. Ray Bradbury took this to his advantage and wrote about a Mars with not only life, but civilization. Years later, Hollywood decided to turn his stories into a cheesy, and partially accurate TV show. Though Hollywood was for the most part loyal to Bradbury’s stories, there were definitely some changes, especially in “And the Moon be Still be as Bright.” First of all, Bradbury starts his story with the rocket already landed, the astronauts are on the surface, and there’s a solemn vibe in the air. It was the fourth expedition to Mars, and as far as they were concerned, it was the first successful one. The same thing happened to the first three expeditions; they landed, reported the landing, went out to explore, and was never heard from again. Hollywood’s version started the night before liftoff. The astronauts were happy at a party with their loved ones. They were drinking, celebrating, and saying goodbye to Earth. After the party, the captain and his wife are sitting outside, and she expresses her doubts about the first two expeditions failing. Hollywood missed a story about an expedition. …show more content…
Unknowingly, we spread the chicken pox to hundreds or thousands of martians which ended up being lethal to them. I also realized that Spender cared so much because he saw the death with his own eyes, while the rest of the astronauts didn’t care as much. Maybe if we can get people today to experience specific hardships for themselves, they’ll want to change what they’d otherwise overlook. I always prefer the book to the movie, mainly because the book often had more detail. I also enjoy how in books, the physical appearance of most objects, landscapes, or people are left to the imagination with only a few descriptive
This is my view on the movie and book. I likes the movie better the book because the
First of all in the book it gives much more detail than the movie. The book written by wilson rawls is much more heartwarming than the movie that was made in 1974. The book had a lot more detail than the movie, the movie has missing events that were in the book. For example in the book Billy had three sisters in the movie
I like the reading book better than watching the movie because there are more facts in the book than the movie. Maybe I just like reading books better than watching movies. That’s my opinion. What’s yours (if you’ve read the book and seen the movie)?
In the book and in the movie, many aspects showed major similarities and differences. This includes the similarities and differences in location, perspective of the conflict, perspective in conveying the horrors of the genocide, and comparisons in personal conflicts that both characters went through. While the movie made a great attempt to convey the massacre, the book was written in a more common reality from an actual survivor of the genocide compared to the movie, which used actors and centered the events more on Paul as to entertain the audience. The book held a personal account which separates it from the movie, but blends in with some main ideas and messages that the movie tried to express.
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.
If the Martian Chronicles had been written in the 1999’s instead of fifty years ago, many issues and problems would change. Ray Bradbury wrote his book in 1946. In it he wrote about problems such as censorship, man’s cruelty to man, and loneliness. Each issue shows up in one or two of his chronicles. All of his issues affect every one of his characters in many different ways.
In the movie, they missed things or changed parts, but they also quoted the book quiet a lot and make the story more a like. Most of the most important parts were in the movie. They missed one of the camps that Corrie was sent to and the didn’t show much of the 100th year party of the watch shop besides a picture. I liked the book way more than the movie because the book had more detail and made you understand what that part of WWII was like more than the movie does. In the book Corrie is learning how to have more faith and trust in God more but in the movie, she had a lot of faith the whole time and she didn’t struggle with that as much. I enjoyed reading about that because it made me feel like I’m not the only one that struggles.
As you can all see the movie for once is actually better than the book in showing the
One of the main differences between the book and movies are how Penn and Krakauer interpret Chris McCandless and his story. In the book the story seems to focus more around examining and understanding Chris and his life, whereas the movie shows his life as more of an
Overall, the movie and book have many differences and similarities, some more important than others. The story still is clear without many scenes from the book, but the movie would have more thought in it.
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.
One thing that can make a book good is characters. In the book, there were many more animals in the farm. The movie did not show many animals except for the main animals. Even thought this is a small difference, it can be noticeable. In the book, Mollie was a character.
Bradbury developed the setting of the story similar to Earth as far aslandscape, atmosphere, and people in order to emphasize his intentions. Themartians are described as if they are American Indians at the time of theAmerican Revolution. For example, in the beginning of the story, Bradburydepicts Martians "they had the fair, brownish skin of the true Martian, the yellowcoin eyes, the soft musical voices." The trees, the towns in Mars, and the grassare all described like Earth landscape. Bradbury's Mars is a mirror of Earth.These plots raise moral issues and reflections of how history may repeat itself. Bradbury portrays Mars as humankind's second world, where we may goafter our Earthly existence. In the episode of "April 2000: The third expedition,"Captain John Black's mother said "you get a second chance to live" (pp.44).Lustig's grandmother said "ever since we died" (pp.40). Humans have a naturalfear of death. Some humans may even have a death wish. Bradbury reveals histhought of death through the connection between Mars and Earth. Through Bradbury's The Martian Chronicles, Bradbury warns us of ourfuture. In the episode of "June 2000: And the Moon ve still as bright," CaptainWilder said, "one day Earth will be as Mars is today...It's an object lesson incivilizations. We'll learn from Mars" (pp. 55). Throught the story, Earth man,especially American think that they are superior than the Martian. Earth mancan do anything and knows everyting. However, Bradbury's message is to tellthem it is not true. Earth man, here American people realize there are manythings that they can learn from others.
Bradbury’s descriptions of Mars give the planet a very earthy feel. He describes the planet’s environment to be identical to earth’s environment. For example, as the Astronauts explore the planet Bradbury writes, “It was a beautiful spring day. A robin sat on the blossoming apple tree and sang continuously” (325). This is a very peculiar way to describe the surrounding of the planet because it makes it sound as if the Astronauts are on earth. Bradbury mentions that it is a beautiful spring day, emphasizing the spring season, the season after autumn, therefore symbolizing a time of rebirth and rejuvenation. The time of spring becomes a key setting component as the story begins to develop. However, along with the descriptions of the environment, the way Bradbury depicts the surroundings of Mars also make it ...
Mars-2005, the planet has been occupied for several years now and Mr. Stendhal has commissioned a complete and stunningly accurate replica of the House of Usher to be built for him. Upon the completion he talks with his architect and we learn in 1975 all of Edgar Allen Poe's books along with many other masterpieces were burnt in the great fire. Any story about horror, fantasy, or the future was burned and by now all of those stories and authors are forgotten by most people. The architect didn't even know the story "The Fall of the House of Usher" and had no idea who Poe was. Stendhal continued to explain: Oh, it started very small. In 1950 and '60 it was a grain of sand. They began by controlling books of cartoons and then detective books and, of course, films, one way or another one group or another, political bias, religious pr...