More handpicked essays just for you.
Comparison between a film and a book
Literature to movie adaptation proces
Comparison between a film and a book
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Books are almost always better than the movies. There is always so much left out of the movie. Sometimes the entire plot will change like in The Scarlet Pimpernel. The Scarlet Pimpernel by Baroness Orczy is a great story of love, action, and mystery. As you read further you will see the points of contrast and comparison between the book and movie, The Scarlet Pimpernel. The book and movie have plenty of differences. Marguerite and Sir Percy’s relationship for example. In the book Marguerite and Sir Percy were in a unhealthy relationship. It was taken over by pride from both parties. They were selfish until they realized how much they loved each other. In the movie the viewers can see the relationship form from the beginning. Marguerite and Sir Percy meet the night when …show more content…
Armand, Marguerite’s brother, is beaten by St. Cyr’s men. Percy steps in and saves him and later is introduced to Marguerite. They fancy each other from the start and date for a while. Later in the movie they get married and Sir Percy is told of Marguerite’s betrayal. Therefore reaching the relationship status in the book of a pride driven marriage. Though, in both the book and movie Sir Percy and Marguerite loved each other passionately. Percy’s character in the book was different than the movie only slightly. In the book Percy was known for being dimwitted and ignorant. The movie in my opinion did a poor job of making him seem dumb. He changed his voice but the things he said were more cunning than stupid. He didn’t seem that dumb, therefore it wasn’t unbelievable for him to be the Scarlet Pimpernel. Marguerite Blakeney was my favorite character in both the book and movie. Her character was well developed and structured. She was a flirt and very beautiful. She cared deeply for her brother, though, her love for her brother could have been shown a bit more in the movie. Any changes in her character in the movie would be the effect of the huge plot change in the book. Chauvelin was evil in the book and in the movie. The only difference is that the writers of the movie made you feel almost sorry for Chauvelin. He was a prude and mean man. He was the perfect villain to the story. I didn’t like that he and Marguerite had a relationship, though. It was disturbing to watch. I was sad that Chavelin never laughed in the movie. In the book Marguerite describes his laugh so distinctly you can almost imagine it. The writers of the movie changed the plot majorly.
They added and subtracted key elements to Baroness Orczy’s original work. They added the capturing and saving of the Prince. They removed the ending of the book completely. It’s almost as if they didn’t even read the ending of the book and came up with their own. There was no Pere Blanchard’s hut or Jew like in the book. You never got to see Marguerite’s struggle to get to Percy to warn him. The movie didn’t focus any on Marguerite trying to save Percy in the end which was a key part in her character transformation in the book. They added Percy’s explanation to Chauvelin about how he tricked him and a duel between Chauvelin and Percy. Like I mentioned before, they added the relationship between Chauvelin and Marguerite, which was unpleasing. There were simple changes in the movie, like the different escapes and costumes. They also added a few characters like Robespierre and Armand’s girlfriend. In the movie Chauvelin forced Marguerite to tattle on St. Cyr but in the book she did it by accident.They also did not put in the Fisherman’s Rest or any of its inhabitants. Because they left so much out there isn’t a lot to contrast just so much
changed. The characters and plot changed in the movie. The movie was still very good though very different and wasn’t as much like the book as it could have been. Now I have laid out some points of contrast and comparison for you from The Scarlet Pimpernel.
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
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 and the story had some of the same characters but some weren't exactly the same. The movie introduced many different characters and changed some of the others. For example, the movie had the plant lady and had the mentor of Anderton as the founders of Precrime while in the book, Anderton was the only founder of Precrime. Also, Witwer wasn't blond he had black hair and Kapler wasn't named Kapler he was named Crow. In the story they had the red head Fleming who did not exist
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.
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
There were many differences in the characters' relationships with each other. For instance, Heather and Melinda’s connection were very different from book to film.
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.
Also, it shows the Valmont character as being more heroic, which in Dangerous Liaisons, he was not quite so heroic. In the movie, it does not really say what happened to Ronald (Danceny). He fights with Sebastian, and that is the last we see of him. Catherine (Merteuil), like in the book, also has her reputation ruined, but she gets humiliated in a more dramatic way (in front of the student body and faculty). Also, there is the issue of drugs.
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.
Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter is one of the most respected and admired novels of all time. Often criticized for lacking substance and using more elaborate camera work, freely adapted films usually do not follow the original plot line. Following this cliché, Roland Joffe’s version of The Scarlet Letter received an overwhelmingly negative reception. Unrealistic plots and actions are added to the films for added drama; for example, Hester is about to be killed up on the scaffold, when Algonquin members arrive and rescue her. After close analysis, it becomes evident of the amount of work that is put into each, but one must ask, why has the director adapted their own style of depicting the story? How has the story of Hester Prynne been modified? Regarding works, major differences and similarities between the characterization, visual imagery, symbolism, narration and plot, shows how free adaptation is the correct term used.
Films of this era are criticized for substituting violence and special effects for "substance". Many believe that creating a movie script is a juvenile form of writing, a shrub to the oak of a novel. Upon reading both the novel The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne and viewing the film produced by Roland Joffe, one notices the tremendous effort put into both. This essay will explore the many differences and similarities between the book and movie.
The book and movie also have quite a bit of things different from each other. To start with, the age of the characters Percy Jackson and Annabeth Chase are twelve years old in the book, but in the movie they are seventeen. Something that the age changes is, in the movie they drive themselves places and you cannot drive until you are at least sixteen years old, wherein the book they don't because they aren’t old enough to drive yet. Percy and Poseidon are explained in the book with black hair and green eyes but in the movie Percy has dark-brown hair and blue eyes and Poseidon has light brown hair and blue eyes. In the book it states that In the movie where she has straight dark brown hair and blue eyes, but in the book it says, “With her deep tan and her curly blond hair, she was almost exactly what I thought a stereotypical California girl would look like, except her eyes ruined the image. They were startling gray, like storm clouds; pretty, but intimidating, too, as if she were analyzing the
In the book it is supposed to be set in around the 1500’s. In the movie it’s supposed to be set around the 1900’s. The clothing changed to. In the book the clothing was Elizabethan style. In the movie they wore modern clothing. They even changed the families profession. In the movie they’re rich and royal families fighting. In the movie their corporations that are running against one another. Even how Romeo acts changed a bit. In the movie before going to the party, Romeo takes ecstasy; however, in the book he does not. They even changed how he snuck in the Capulet’s house. In the movie he only did it at night, but in the book he was never able to sneak in the house because of security. There’s also a small detail left out of the movie. In the book they had a clown, or jester. In the movie they had no need for a clown, or jester. They even changed the transportation. In the book they rode horses everywhere. In the movie there were no horses, they used vehicles instead. To give it a more modern feel, since it is in the modern
One last thing that the book and movie have in common: what happens throughout the story. Both tell the story of Percy finding out who his father is and his powers, while the gods are verging on a war.
The movie writers changed the movie plot too much. For instance: In the book, Percy was told to go find the lightning