Comparing Lord Of The Flies Movie And Book Comparison Essay

687 Words2 Pages

Many books are transformed into motion pictures that usually contain plots that differ from the original publication. William Golding’s Lord of the Flies novel was transformed into two theatrical versions, the 1963 version, directed by Peter Brook and the 1990 version, directed by Harry Hook. All three of the mentioned works are about a group of boys who get stranded on an island in the middle of nowhere after their plane crashes. Here we shall contrast the differences between the two Lord of the Flies movies: the exclusion of important scenes, the exposition, and character traits. In the two theatrical versions, many scenes were not included in both works. The 1963 version had some scenes that the 1990 version did not include, and vice versa. For instance, in the 1963 version, which mirrors the novel, the boys start a fire and then suddenly the fire spreads rapidly to the island. The 1990 version did show the boys starting the fire, but excluded the scene where the fire spread. However, in the 1990 …show more content…

For example, in the 1963 version of Lord of the Flies, a plane crashes onto the island and the boys are stuck on the island. Contrastingly, in the 1990 production, the boys are shown swimming towards the island, from which we can assume the plane had crashed in the ocean. Another example of the different expositions is that in the 1963 movie, no pilot was shown on the island with boys when they crashed. Instead, the pilot was found in a cave and believed to be the beast whom the boys feared. On the other hand, in the 1990 movie, the pilot was with the boys when the plane crashed and they were stranded on the island. However, he was not a major character due to the face that he did pretty much nothing in the movie other than sleep and act like a zombie. A difference in the two expositions led to major contrasts between the two movie versions of Golding’s Lord of the

Open Document