The Crucible Play Vs Movie Essay

When I watch a good movie I feel pulled into a different universe it’s almost like your actually there.In the movie The Crucible its very good at pulling you in and putting you in the shoes of the people who had to go through the witch trials. This is in part to actor Daniel Lewis who plays John Proctor in the film, it’s almost like you know him it really shows you who he is and where he came from. Looking in the other direction the play shows a more human approach to The Crucible in some peoples opinions.The Crucible is best performed in the form of a movie because of the realistic settings and great performance by the actors.
I think that the movie The Crucible did the best at portraying the characters. In the movie you can really see all the pain and stupidity of the events that took place in Salem in 1692. The characters in the movie The crucible i think were chosen wisely as they look the appropriate age and just look the part. In the the play I do not think it showed it nearly as good as the actors were older in the play than the movie. In the movie the props and outfits displayed by the characters were much more realistic and accurate to the time period. The movie really lets you get into the characters roles and see them as the colonists they play in the play

however if you aren't engaged it just doesn't seem real.
In the movie The Crucible the character John Proctor is played very well so much so that when I think of The Crucible I think of him.

The emotion that John proctor shows in the movie is very realistic and convincing. When you watch his parts in the movie the way he talks is just like I would imagine a person living in 1692 to talk like. In the movie when your watching his parts the camera angle is very good at portraying his story well and showing his emotions without him having to speak. In the play your sitting ten foot away from the actors if that and you cant see the emotion as well. The way he acts in the final scenes of the film really showed me what it would’ve felt like to be in that

situation.
On the other side of the argument you could say the play is more original in comparison to the movie as it was written to be performed in the style of a play. While watching the play it's more refreshing to not be staring at a screen and rather people acting out the parts. To some it is more pleasing to watch the realism of people in front of you acting the part rather than on the screen. You might also say that the play does a better job of focusing actions of the actors instead of the lines. Whilst watching the play people with a different opinion might think that the actions performed by actors is more artistic than that of the movies actors. While not entirely true the play can be seen as a more true to life comparison of the witch trials
The play The Crucible is best acted out through the performance of the movie because of the great job done by the actors in the realm of realism. The film did a great job of showing you all the characters and their differences. The actor Daniel Lewis did an amazing job in acting out the part of John Proctor. In some people's minds the play is better in the job of realism and setting. The best way to look at the work of Arthur Miller's crucible is without a doubt the film.