Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Similarities between film and LITERATURE
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Similarities between film and LITERATURE
In the comparison between The Island of Lost Souls and “The Island of Dr. Moreau, there is a clear use of close adaptation. Desmond and Hawkes say, “A film is a close adaptation when most of the narrative elements in the literary text are kept in the film” (Desmond and Hawkes 44). There is a clear use of close adaptation in the scene where Edward Pendick meets someone on the island. The people that Edward meets when he is on the island are all bestial. In the novel, Edward meets a lady named M’Ling and in the film he meets a servant named Lota. This scene is the same, but different names are being used. In the film, The Island of Lost Souls, Edward and his crew arrive on an island and are greeted by Captain Davies. Captain Davies is captain …show more content…
The big issue with this is that neither movie goers or people that read the books are not satisfied. They are not satisfied because their favorite scene from the book doesn’t happen in the movie or vice versa. They always want the movie and the novel to be alike. An example of a movie and a novel being a like would be Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. This movie is a “close adaptation partly because J.K. Rowling, the best-selling author of the Harry Potter series, knew that she had a loyal readership, and so in selling the film rights, she stipulated that the film stay close to the Potter text, even insisting on her approval of the director and the actors” (Desmond and Hawkes 44). J.K. Rowling continued to release the rights the of her books to be made into a movie because her readers were so happy with it. In order for the audience to like the movie as much as the book, you have to make sure it is close to the book. Desmond and Hawke say, “In talking about adaptations, it seems natural enough to talk about the author of the text and the director of the film as equivalent” (Desmond and Hawkes 44). The author of a book and the director of the film are the same because they both create
The books, A Wrinkle in Time and And Then There Were None, both have many differences in the movie versions. The directors of both movies change the plot to make the movie see fit to what they may have imaged the book to be, while still keeping the story line the same.
Many novels are transcribed from their original texts to films. Some of the movies are similar to the original plots, others do not follow the authors work. Alice Hoffman’s novel Practical Magic is altered when it is made into a movie; and Arthur Miller’s play The Crucible which was also made into a movie, was extremely similar to his original writing. There are multiple variables that account for how a movie is made some of them include; the amount of income, how much can be changed, and the author’s approval. The two recreations previously mentioned, have two completely different outcomes, the results all depend on the amount of creative licensing the movie company has.
A Comparison A Sound of Thunder by Ray Bradbury and The Star by H.G. Wells
When placed on a deserted island, a group of strangers banded together to try to survive. They decided on a leader, problem-solved, fought off a beast, and formed their own society, even if it was somewhat flawed. This was the situation in the famous TV show, Lost. The Lord of the Flies and Lost are similar in these many different ways, with the exception that the show featured a tribe of adults instead of children. That just proves how difficult it is to maintain order in a society; even the adults struggled with keeping it peaceful and civilized. In Lord of the Flies, William Golding presents a broken society of savage boys fighting one another to suggest that man’s capacity for evil is brought out by the need for power and control.
The Glass Castle is a memoir written by Jeannette Walls was released in 2005. The movie was released December 7th, 2017, and was based upon that memoir. The screenplay writers were Destin Daniel Cretton, Marti Noxon, and Andrew Lanham. Unlike many others, I was impressed with the movie as a whole. The movie does not exactly line up with the memoir, but the movie gives sufficient visuals for what Jeannette and her siblings endured. The characters lived up to their roles for the most part which gives support to the movie. There are a few scenes missing in the movie version, but the scenes that are included do justice for portraying Jeannette’s experiences to her readers.
In the Hobbit an Unexpected Journey, Bilbo Baggins is “… considered … very respectable…because [he] never had any adventures or did anything unexpected” (Tolkien 2). Bilbo was respectable until he went on an adventure with Gandalf the Grey and Dwarfs to reclaim the Lonely Mountain, the dwarves’ homeland. The book was also portrayed a series of movies. The movies and the book have many differences. One of the major differences is the addition of the orcs into the movie to add the physical action, monomyth elements that were missing in the book, and to further develop the movie characters.
Every other movie today seems to be taken from a novel. This is not necessarily terrible, but there are a few guidelines when it comes to converting a novel into film. The utmost critical aspect is preserving the theme. Theme is the large and small ideas which aid in explaining the actions and events in a work of literature or film. This can be accomplished through the handling of characters and their relationships with others or their own morals and values. It is perfectly acceptable to alter the plot of a novel, but it cannot violate the theme or tone. Ultimately, the theme and tone are what the reader or viewer takes away from the work. Movies are not just watched for their entertainment, but also to relate to and learn from. Of course, not all film adaptations are done properly. Arguably, one of the “so-called” greatest Stephen King horror films is The Shining starring Jack Nicholson. Stanley Kubrick 's film, although full of iconic scenes and quotes, is not
However, unfortunately, it does not guarantee the audience and the production group that the film must be a nice one to watch. But is this the end of the world? No. It is not difficult to find that there are always a large group of people like to watch the film version after they read the novel, or vice versa. In other words, they could be a pair of nice partner to sell the story itself. To the author, it is undoubtedly a good thing. However, to the audience may not be the ones who are benefited. People should still consider to have a look on the reviews before they start to read or watch the story- with there are more people just treating the film market and the book market as some profit-making industries, more and more unsatisfying works occur. Being a smart audience and reader, people should always select carefully for the ones that satisfy their own favors and with
Horrifying, heartbreaking, uplifting, and inspiring; it is hard to believe these four adjectives can all be used to describe Sapphire’s novel, Push and the 2009 movie based on it, Precious. Portraying, albeit differently, the harsh life of Claireece “everybody call me Precious” (6) Jones, both mediums deliver powerful messages of revulsion, sympathy, and hope in their representations of the realities the young African-American girl faced and struggled to overcome. Although, the overall story remains consistent in the transition from novel to film there are also notable differences, some large and others seemingly more trivial, which affect the observer’s emotional reactions. Changes in portrayal method, overall concept, and minor admissions work together, making the movie, although poignant, somewhat less effective.
When discussing the writing of screenplays, regardless of genre, they can be broken into two different categories: original and adaptations. With screenplays that are adaptations, their faithfulness to their literary source is divided into three degrees: loose, faithful, and literal. Audience members that are fans of the original literary source often dislike loose adaptation, because directors stray so far from the original piece.
It seems like every year Hollywood does a motion picture interpretation of a novel and although the movie may become a box office hit, the novel will always be much more detailed and in depth. Movie producers and directors try to fit an entire book filled with the tiniest of details into approximately an hour and thirty minutes of entertainment, therefore are forced to cut out many important details. For instance, “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone” a children’s literature novel written by J.K. Rowling was transferred to the big screen in 2001. Though the movie stayed “…surprisingly faithful to the novel,” according to Roger Ebert, it still lacked some major details that contributed to building the magical world of “Harry Potter.”
Linda Hutchison defines film adaptation as “repetition not replication”2 meaning that we change the original narrative so as to alter and adjust it to make it suitable, keeping in mind the requirements of the viewers and fidelity to the original text. As Francesco Casseti writes in his essay that literature and film are both “mod...
According to the article, “ Are Books Better than Films?”, “Films can bring whole worlds to life before our eyes, make characters into living, breathing fleshing blood, but books let you live everything” (“Are Books Better than Films?”). Very often book lovers are unsatisfied with the movie adaption of their favorite book. No doubt there have been great book based movies but that does not take the place of reading the actual novel. Reading books is better than watching the movie. This is better because often the movie tends to misinterpret information, which changes the plot, and lack sufficient character development.
Adaptation of any kind has been a debate for many years. The debate on cinematic adaptations of literary works was for many years dominated by the questions of fidelity to the source and by the tendencies to prioritize the literary originals over their film versions (Whelehan, 2006). In the transference of a story from one form to another, there is the basic question of adherence to the source, of what can be lost (Stibetiu, 2001). There is also the question of what the filmmakers are being faithful to or is it the novel’s plot in every detail or the spirit of the original (Smith, 2016). These are only few query on the issue of fidelity in the film adaptation.
Nevertheless, there are also some critical but still influential notions as one of George Bluestone. In 1957 he wrote a prominent book Novels into Film in which he writes that “[t]he film and the novel remain separate institutions...As long as the cinema remains as omnivorous as it is for story material, its dependence on literature will continue” (qtd. in DiPaolo 2007: 12). It changes a view of adaptation and so adaptations and original novels are not the same, and films depend on literature