Some people may prefer the movie or the novel, the boy in the striped pajamas. Although I have assorted feelings about both versions,the two adaptations had their differences. For instance, in the novel Bruno is eight, not nine. Despite the fact, the movie has many added and needed details like during the dinner with the grandfather. About the discussions and real feelings of Jewish people. In the novel, it started off as Bruno coming home to everyone packing up to move and Bruno being very confused. However, in the film, he was playing with his three friends and you could see the Jewish people being forcefully put in a truck. You could really see how life was like in berlin back then. The novel was well put with the father being like a real …show more content…
The commandant said the camp was miles away from the house. I found the book was not able to quite express how Elsa felt and show her discomfort and distress. Also, the movie showed how bored Bruno was before he met Shmuel and the mother trying to entertain him with the radio and trying to get him to draw,most likely to stay out of the backyard or anywhere near the camp. This story is about two boys of the same age becoming great friends, but being stuck on the wrong side of the fence. Yet, in the novel they didn’t seem that close, yes they were friends but they spent a lot of time being mad at each other. However, in the film they had a ball to play with and Bruno brought a chess board it also looked like they had a lot more time to become friends before their first and last adventure together, so they seemed closer. Also, the ending seems more realistic because they search for Bruno straight after they realize he’s missing, not a month after. For the most part, I would have to say I like the movie more because it gives me a better idea of the whole situation of world war II to Bruno’s confusion. I think that the film was able to show more details of the difficult past and Bruno and Shmuel story. Even though the book was very well
The movie and the book were both appreciable and they illustrated how important remembering is. I personally liked the book better because it had more details and I liked the characters better. I liked Gertrude and Aaron. I would recommend this book to 8th graders around the world because it fits their age. They need to know that remembering the past is essential and that the Holocaust did not just happen to Jews. Always remember, and never, EVER,
This is my view on the movie and book. I likes the movie better the book because the
For example, Mama goes to the bank in the movie and is given a hard time about paying her mortgage, but this did not happen in the book. Another major difference is that the school bus scene, where the Logan kids played a trick on the white kids, was not shown in the movie, even though it was an important part of the story. There are some character changes as well. Lillian Jean, Jeremy, R.W, and Melvin are Simms’ in the book, but in the movie they are Kaleb Wallace’s children. However, the main plot difference is how the movie starts in the middle, summarizing everything from the first part of the book very briefly. Additionally, many scenes are switched around and placed out of order. Altogether, the plot and character changes contribute to my unfavorable impression of the
Book or movie? This seems to be a pretty common debate, especially seeing there are so many differences between the two. Ranging from the beginning of the story to the visual aspects of the characters as compared to their descriptions, the differences are quite apparent. The book “The Outsiders” is a wonderful story, and has been read year after year by the youths in schools. But, how does it really compare to its later made movie version?
Both book and movie capture good moments and ideas of Esquivel. I would say the book was more entertaining and memorable for me. The novel never rests or drags on, and although it evolves around many tragedies a dying love and lovers, in the end you truly feel happy for the way things turn to be. So does the movie, the end of it is very powerful, I might have not got attached to its characters but I fell in love with the magical fairy tale and romance of Like Water For Chocolate.
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.
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.
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 film portrayed the kids being overly whelmed with hatred when they received gifts from their parents. It was like they never knew their parents existed. Another example of the difference between the book and the movie is Mr. Freeman (mother’s boyfriend) was presented as being very reserved with the children. In the movie he was seen as warm, talkative, and friendly towards Maya and her brother. The film also showed Mr. Freeman’s manly behavior by confronting Vivian (Maya’s mother) at her job. However, in the book Mr. Freeman never left the house, he always sat and waited at home for her.
The two films “The Boy in the Striped Pajamas” and “Life is Beautiful”. The two movies are based around the holocaust and presents a different side of each story of the holocaust. “The Boy in the Striped Pajamas” provides a more accurate version of the holocaust showing all the pain and suffering people went through. Then “Life is Beautiful” gives a more pleasant and hopeful side to the holocaust providing some comedic relief.
From reading the book and watching the movie, I think the book was more insightful, but the movie was more entertaining. The only problem with the movie is that you don't know what is going through Chance's mind and his background information. The movie does help make some things clearer by seeing it, instead of just picturing it in your mind. The added scenes in the movie helps to put some humor into the story and make it more entertaining. By just watching the movie, some people could be confused if they don't know some background on Chance. I think that by reading the book, you can understand the story better and by watching the movie you can enjoy the story better.
This film portrays one of humanity’s greatest modern tragedies, through heartache and transgression, reflecting various themes throughout the movie. Beyond the minor themes some seem to argue as more important in the film, the theme of friendship and love is widely signified and found to be fundamental in understanding the true meaning behind The Boy in the Striped Pajamas. Director Mark Herman presents a narrative film that attests to the brutal, thought-provoking Nazi regime, in war-torn Europe. It is obvious that with Herman’s relatively clean representation of this era, he felt it was most important to resonate with the audience in a profound and philosophical manner rather than in a ruthlessly infuriating way. Despite scenes that are more graphic than others, the film's objective was not to recap on the awful brutality that took place in camps such as the one in the movie.
He really wondered why shumel was what was there the whole time that he never knew about.In the film I noticed a lot of changes based on how he found out he was moving because in the movie he found out because his parents told him that they were going away and were going to move and he had to get his stuff all packed.Then in the book he found out he was moving when he came home from school and maria the maid started packing and once he came and found that he asks his mom and mom tell and explains to him that they are going to be moving.The second difference I noticed in the film how mom had a drinking problem in the movie she does not drink at all very much and in the book she drinks a lot more.The last similarity I noticed in the movie was how mom in the movie said the man I married is a monster and even your does not love you. On the other hand in the book grandma in the book does love him but is discouraged on what he does based on his work in the movie as a Nazi because he was apart of that Jewish part where the Jewish had to be slaves to them because they thought the Jews were bad people. In conclusion I noticed a lot of similarities and differences based on what I read and saw you should read this book because it helps you get a better understanding on what happens back then and what the Jews were put through
“Night” and “The Boy in the Striped Pajamas” show different points of view of the holocaust. The movie shows the holocaust from the point of view of Bruno, the son of a nazi. The book shows the holocaust from the point of view of a Jewish boy, named Elie Wiesel, in a concentration camp. Both the book and the movie still show what happened
In most cases, when both a film version and book version appear of the same title, the book version is far superior. Think The Hobbit, the Harry Potter series, nearly every Stephen King novel. But in the case of Schindler’s List, by Thomas Keneally and film by Steven Spielberg, the film exceeds the book. Why? Because cinematic techniques and visual symbolism enabled Spielberg to make creative choices that would be impossible to achieve in book form.