Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Character analysis where are you going
123 essays on character analysis
Into the wild character analysis
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Character analysis where are you going
The movie I chose, “The Goodfellas”, was adapted from a novel. The novel in which it’s adopted from is called “Wiseguy”. The author is Nicholas Pileggi and the book was published in 1986, four years before the movie “The Goodfellas” was created (MET). However; the book and novel have some differences throughout one another. I found it interesting as I watched the movie before I read the book “Wiseguy” and I did not know the differences until after I read them. It turns out there are quite a few differences in the movie in comparison to the book. When comparing length to length the book contains 256 pages. From my opinion that is the average amount of pages in a book. Referring to the book in which the class had to read Fight Club, when reading …show more content…
that I noticed it was in the low 200s. As for the movie the time length was two hours and thirty two minutes. For a movie this is long, it covers everything from the start of his gangster legacy until the end. However; length to length I think the movie is longer than the book. When comparing the cutting of scenes I noticed there was some scenes cut during this film. During the book, Henry joins the army. However; in the movie he never ended up joining the army. Another scene that doesn’t happen is when Henry and his family are harassed and he goes and beats the guy up. Overall, I think the reason some scenes of the film were cut was because they added some scenes and if they added the deleted scene it might not correlate properly with the film. The next comparison is visualizing, double-taking and voicing exposition. The visualization was easier in the film when comparing the two although the book gave a good sense of what the setting was like. During the film it’s narrated by Henry (Ray Liotta) and his experiences throughout the film. The narration is done in first person by Henry Hill. He explains from the beginning his love and interest to be a gangster. It also shows the rise and fall of the gangster. What I thought was fascinating was how they showed them joining and why they would consider joining the mob. The comparison between the cuttings of characters isn’t really common in this movie. The movie mainly revolved around one guy and the characters names stayed the same. The movie revolves around the character Henry Hill. His wife is Karen, and his main crew members names are; Tommy, Jimmy, and Paulie. There are some changes in certain scenes such as; the adding, and changing of scenes from the book to the movie.
A scene added in the movie that wasn’t in the book was; the honorable “How I am funny” scene. The scene was added due to a recommendation by the actor Joe Pesci. A changed scene that is in the book is when Henry goes on a double date with Paulie’s son rather than in the movie, where Henry went on a double date with Tommy. Another thing I noticed was there were some rearrangements from the book to the movie. A reason why this would occur was to follow from the changes of scenes. The rearrangement during this film was when Henry had his first court date while in the movie it showed Paulie being there however; in the novel he wasn’t due to serving a prison sentence. Lastly both these stories involve first person accounts. The experiences were from the gangster Henry Hill. Throughout both explanations, the movie and book, he explains his life and hardship of being a gangster. The difference between these two first-person experiences was one was visualization while the other was trying to adapt an understanding. The movie really touched up on the understanding after reading the book and rewatching the movie. It let the viewers understand the setting, along with the personality in a visual
aspect. In all, I noticed there was many comparisons between these two. Noticing the movie was made only four years after the book was published was surprising. After reading the book and watching the movie I thought the movie explained it in very similar aspects. Since they are personal experiences from the gangster, Henry Hill, it was best to say they didn’t change anything no matter how brutal the content may have been. After reading the book and watching the film it gave a better understanding of what a gangster’s life was like back then. In all, it set a greater understanding of what a gangsters life was like and it is known to be one of the best gangster films adapted from the book itself “Wiseguy!”
Most movies that are inspired by books hold some relation to the author's version, but are changed to fit the director's vision and perhaps make the movie more presentable. "Paul's Case" the movie, beginning to the end, is basically the same, but slight differences were found in the characters' physical traits, setting, some symbolism, and the plot. However, these changes were not significant enough to change the story as a whole.
First of all in the beginning of the movie it has Maniac Magee at his parent’s funeral and he runs away straight to Two Mills. In the book Maniac is with his relatives and he can’t stand the fighting between his aunt and his uncle so he runs to Two-Mills. I like this part of the book better because I think the situation of why he runs away is more interesting. Another set of plot events in the book that are different are the three plot events that Maniac goes through when he first comes to Two-Mills. In the movie the same three plot events that are at the beginning of the book are distributed all throughout the movie. I like this about the book better because when the movie puts the three plot events in there are terrible
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
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.
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...
In both the novel and movie focus on the war. The war influences the characters to enroll.Also, the main setting is at the Devon School. However, in the novel Gene visits Leper at his house but in the movie Leper lives in the woods.In the novel Gene is coming back to the Devon School 15 years later.However, in the book he is coming to Devon as a new student.Therefore, similarities and differences exist in time and setting in the novel and the movie.In the novel and the movie there are similarities and differences in events, character, and time and setting.
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.
For example, in the film Nick is introduced as a recovering alcoholic and is in rehab writing about his story involving The Great Gatsby. In the novel, Nick is not introduced as an alcoholic and does not overuse it. He states at the first party in the movie, “I have been drunk just twice in my life, and the second time was that afternoon…” (Fitzgerald 29). However, in the movie we learn that Nick was someone who overused alcohol and is now in rehab writing his own stories. Another contrast between the novel and the film would be that in the novel, Gatsby tells Nick how Daisy was driving the night that Myrtle was struck and killed by Gatsby’s yellow car. Speaking to Nick, Gatsby says, “You see, when we left New York she (Daisy) was very nervous and she thought it would steady her to drive-- and this woman rushed out at us just as we were passing a car coming along the other way. It all happened in a minute...first Daisy turned away from the woman toward the other car, and then she lost her nerve and turned back. The second my hand hit the wheel I felt the shock..” (Fitzgerald 143-144). However, in the film the split second on the screen shows Gatsby driving the car as Myrtle was killed. These are two major differences between the novel and the
Some of the characters in the novel, like Lennie, are portrayed differently in the movie. In the novel, Lennie is said to be “a huge man” (2), but in the movie he isn’t very big, although he is bigger than George and some of the other characters. In the movie he is stronger and bigger than the others, but not to the extreme amount that the book portrays him to be. Also, Lennie is depicted as very mentally challenged, which is shown by the way he speaks. Whereas in the book, Lennie is said to have a mind of a young child instead of being disabled. As well as Lennie, Curley’s wife is represented a little bit differently. In the movie,...
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
The plot in the film is very similar to the book but in parts, especially towards the end, the plot is slightly different to the film. The plot is varied in the film to show
Each version also has the main characters boarding up the windows. Anyone who thought the birds won’t attack are usually found dead, but in the movie they are found with their eyes pecked out. Also, both the story and the movie have REALLY bad endings! They aren’t very similar, but they both leave you hanging. When you see a movie or read a book you want to know what happens to the main characters. In these two, you didn’t get an ending. They left you hanging and for some people that ruins it all.
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.
Of the many changes made between the book and the movie, most were made to keep the audience interested in the story. Most people who watch TV don’t have a long attention span. Executives at NBC didn’t want to spend millions to produce a movie and then have nobody watch it. The screenwriters had to throw in some clever plot twists to keep people interested. Another reason the movie was different from the book was the material in the book was a little too racy for network TV. Take the ending, for example, nobody wants to see a grown man hang himself. This was a reason the producers had to change some material in the movie.
In the book, Tom, Huck, and another character named Jim voyage of to an island to see if the townspeople miss them. In the movie, they do the same thing, except for Jim is not with them, and a whole other group of people are. They also never reach an island, and camp out there. Now you can probably see why the movie was a bit frustrating to watch, having after read the book.