More handpicked essays just for you.
Key words for compare and contrast essay
Compare and contrast essays
Key words for compare and contrast essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Between the book and the movie I prefer the movie. My reasoning for this is that the movie seemed much more interesting to me. It made much more sense. I also love who they chose to play the characters in the movie. Seemed much more interesting than the ones that were in the book. I must admit that the book was pretty good, though some of it I found rather boring. One thing I did not like about the movie is that they changed or added some details into the movie that the book did not have. The ending of the movie was much better then the ending in the book. When you read a book and then go to watch the movie you know that the book and the movie are usually different. In this case it was not really true. I believe the reason for that is because the book is so short they had plenty of time to make the movie around the same way the writer originally wrote it. Some of the additions to the movie that I did not personally like were: First off, the setting of the movie was around Christmas time. I understand that they need to make a way to get Sir Henry Baskerville to Stapleton's house towa...
This is my view on the movie and book. I likes the movie better the book because the
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)?
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?
There are many differences in the movie that were not in the book. In the movie there is a new character in the movie that was not in the book. This character was David Isay.
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.
I think that most of the event in the movie were not in the same order that Jeannette had wrote them. After reading the book I had a different picture in mind of how each character would look and it threw me off for the rest of the movie. I did like the fact that I could see what was happening and not just imagine things in my head that I thought was happening, as I was watching the movie I was seeing the same thing everyone else was and not just what I was picturing while reading the
The movie lacks a lot of insight onto the other characters in the book, it mostly focuses on Ponyboy. For example, in the movie there was a lack of detail on characters such as Darry and Sodapop even Dally. Dally was a major character in the book but his death in the movie seemed a bit minor because there wasn’t much detail for viewers to get attached to his character. I felt as if his death was glazed over and easily forgotten in the movie while in the book it was described for at least two pages.
The differences in the movie and the book might have been intentional. If audiences were to read the book, watch the movie, and reach conclusions, I think they would have great understanding of what’s inside them both. For example, a scene in the movie in which Atticus tells his children why it is a sin to kill a mockingbird was not in the book; from that scene, I inferred on how that became the initial title of the book. By using both resources, I was able to gather information and grasp its contents tighter.
From the start, the movie is adapted from the novel and therefore it could not cover everything, some actions or acts in the novel are too dense such that it is not of any importance to angle them in the movie. It is very realistic to everyone that the movie cannot cover every single paragraph in the novel even the memorable ones. Some materials are left out in the film, and others were changed.
I don’t like the movie as much as I like the book because the movie doesn’t really demonstrate the futuristic world that the author depicted. It disappoints me because, like I’ve said earlier, the setting of the story is what interested me the most. But the movie, unfortunately, was not able to convey it. And I didn’t expect the movie to create a futuristic world either because back in 1966, technology was not advanced. Aside from technological issues, there are some changes in the movie. In the book, the girl who inspires Guy Montag, Clarisse McClellan, dies due to a speeding car, but in the movie, she still lives. I personally prefer the book’s way because I think Clarisse’s death was a key factor in leading to the main conflict of the book. Overall, I think that the book is far more interesting than the movie because the book is just more descriptive and
One major difference in the movie that was not in the book was the starting scene of the movie was set in the moor with Sir Charles being attacked by the Hound. In the book the starting scene was when Watson and Holmes had just found a walking stick that had the initials C.C.H. on it. I think that the movie starting scene was more informative because it let you know about what was happening and it also gave some more suspense to the film.
I have only included what I have to believe are largely important plot gaps and differences in the movie version in comparison to the book one, and so I apologize again if I have missed any other major ones. Forgive me, please.
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.
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.
Generally, the film follows the storyline of Atwood's book quite well other than a few exceptions. The changes the movie made probably do work better just because of the fact that it is a movie. Some things are better explained in books than they could ever be explained in a movie.