Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
History of hispanics in films
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: History of hispanics in films
The grains of paradise is a short story that was made into a move. In the grains of paradise cordell is a professor from New Mexico who is visiting a friend. Cordell is looking for a hot pepper to sell in mass quantities. In the end cordell finds the best pepper to sell. I believe that the movie was better than the book. THEME The movie was better than the book because the movie showed the theme of doing the right thing is more important than winning. First of all, the you got a clear visual of what the town was like. When Cordell went to talk to his friend, you could see the people living in the town and what they looked like. Clearly the movie showed how proud Cordell was to brag about his ability to eat hot peppers when he get challenged …show more content…
First of all being able to see the town's aesthetic instead of reading a description changes what you think about the characters. When Cordello shows up in the buss you see the red dirt and the town walls made out of dried clay, making you think that the people in the town would be as poor as the durit they walked on. Tio, for example, comes of as a sad excuse of a husband, but when you see him in the movie your assumption of him changes. Additionally when you read the book your ideal of what that characters look like and when you see the same characters in the movie they're completely different. The person I thought Cordell would be was so much calmer and more collected than he seems in the story. Cordell was much kinder than I thought he would be in the book she seemed to make rash decisions. The characters behaved different in the book compared to the movie which added a new aspect to the movie and not the book. Hilario Villarreal was different in the story than he was in the book Hilario Villareal was more of a grumpy old man in the book but in the movie he is a man that takes charge. Lastly the way the people of the town treated Cordell after his pepper challenge was better shown in the movie and not the book. Overall i believe that the movie better showed the emotional reaction of the characters
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)?
While watching the movie, I could see that the main characters in the book, both their names and traits, were the same in both the movie and book. However, aside from that there were many different as...
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.
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.
As you can all see the movie for once is actually better than the book in showing the
Though the events and a lot of the dialogue are the same in both the book and the movie the crux of the two are completely different. The book focuses a lot more on sexual tension and sexual exploration. The...
When you get to the beginning, middle, or end u realize they are both very different. The movie and book have a lot in common like they both have the same characters .
Usually movies try to take the story to a different level or by adding parts or just try to change it to a completely different story. Some of the differences between the movie as to the book are some little and large differences. They might also try taking little parts away that will change how the readers see the story characters. An example of that would be Walter not smoking in the movie (Pg 115). Walter usually smokes because he is stressed or just as a way to relax. Walter also does not get punched by Mam...
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.
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.
At this point, the readers create their own movie in a way. They will determine important aspects of how the character speaks, looks like, and reacts. Whereas, in the movie, the reader has no choice but to follow the plot laid out in front of them. No longer can they picture the characters in their own way or come up with their different portrayals. The fate of the story, while still unpredictable, was highly influenced by the way the characters looked, spoke, and presented themselves on screen.
The movie was different from the book in a lot of aspects. One of the most noticeable was at the very ending of the movie where Ichabod lives and marries Katrina. Considering that Ichabod lives it doesn’t give as much as a thrilling and spooky ending as it does in the book. The movie did have good points aswell, my favorite part of the movie was the chase scene when Ichabod was running away from the horseman. The movie made the chase scene even more thrilling by making the camera angles weird and crooked as we saw our protagonist running for his life. Let alone, It made scared a little when the horseman was getting close. In the book the chase scene wasn’t as thrilling. In all honesty, I think the chase in the book was great but not as good as the movie.
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.
Although the acting in the movie was good and the adaption of the story into scripted lines generally went quite well, the majority of descriptive writing was lost and that’s what really helped me connect with the characters and their situations in the book. The fact that the stories were still authentic in the movie, and the characters still served as narrators for their experiences Considering how many stories are intertwined into the general plot, the book moves quite naturally. But the film seemed fragmented to me, with the constant flipping back and forth between time periods and narrators. I think the movie did a good job of organizing the different tales in an understandable way, but the book did a much better job of really conveying each character’s story. I found that the book really easy to follow but the movie was a little confusing because all the stories just flowed into each other, sometimes without much explanation or background information.