Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The help film analysis essay
The help film analysis essay
The help film analysis essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The help film analysis essay
work of art it has relied on and in turn how each audience connects with the work of art in the first place and then the film that is a work of adaptation. This leads us to a palimpsestic observation that a work of adaptation is a derivation from a previous work without really being imitative. "Adaptation includes almost any act of alteration performed upon specific cultural works of past and dovetails with a general process of cultural recreation." (Fishclin) Ever since the time the first films were made till date, the scholars of film studies and critics alike have been puzzled by the similar fundamental questions; the most basic of these is, the debate between the real and the reel world. How can one justify whether silence or sound …show more content…
For many years, the film adaptations of books were seen as inferior by the critics and film enthusiasts. Most opined that the film version of the text lacked the essence of the original book. The films were simply penurious versions of the high standard texts. The cinematic versions could do no justice to the written word. It merely flattened everything out onto a screen for the viewer to see. The books with it's meticulous descriptions wonderful schemes of plot offered a lot more to the reader. It provided the reader with the space to imagine as one wished and accordingly delve deeper into the meanings implied. There was certainly more room for absorbing elements and a lot was left to the reader's own interpretation. The critics also argued that unlike books, the films left no room for one to probe deeper into the text. It had many shortcomings. Not everything written in the book could be filmed. In such circumstances, the filmmaker would make a film with wae resources that were available at hand and this in turn was a drawback. The filmmaker provided a ready-to-view version of the text thus not allowing the viewers' to rely on thier own imagination. It was like saying that the viewer was at the mercy of the filmmaker and had to swallow the bite offered to him without protesting of mentioning if he preferred it. The film could never delve deeper into what the book had to offer, lest …show more content…
Why does this happen? Well, everyone who has loved reading a book and have entered the enthralling world of the human mind where there exist new realms of imagination would always love the magic of the book or the written word. They eagerly await its cinematic adaptation in order to view it onscreen; its places, characters, events come to life but often, the adapted version is very different from the original book and this leaves the readers dissatisfied. While in some cases when the film is a faithful copy of the original, it is criticised for 'going by the book' way too
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.
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...
Filmmaking and cinematography are art forms completely open to interpretation in a myriad ways: frame composition, lighting, casting, camera angles, shot length, etc. The truly talented filmmaker employs every tool available to make a film communicate to the viewer on different levels, including social and emotional. When a filmmaker chooses to undertake an adaptation of a literary classic, the choices become somewhat more limited. In order to be true to the integrity of the piece of literature, the artistic team making the adaptation must be careful to communicate what is believed was intended by the writer. When the literature being adapted is a play originally intended for the stage, the task is perhaps simplified. Playwrights, unlike novelists, include some stage direction and other instructions regarding the visual aspect of the story. In this sense, the filmmaker has a strong basis for adapting a play to the big screen.
From the start, the movie is adapted from the novel and therefore it could not cover everything, some actions or acts in the novel are too dense such that it is not of any importance to angle them in the movie. It is very realistic to everyone that the movie cannot cover every single paragraph in the novel even the memorable ones. Some materials are left out in the film, and others were changed.
...ing message and provide an emotional punch to equal the book's resonance, which would have probably made a longer film, but added to the continuity if the film.
Film and literature are two media forms that are so closely related, that we often forget there is a distinction between them. We often just view the movie as an extension of the book because most movies are based on novels or short stories. Because we are accustomed to this sequence of production, first the novel, then the motion picture, we often find ourselves making value judgments about a movie, based upon our feelings on the novel. It is this overlapping of the creative processes that prevents us from seeing movies as distinct and separate art forms from the novels they are based on.
Whenever books are adapted for film, changes inevitably have to be made. The medium of film offers several advantages and disadvantages over the book: it is not as adept at exploring the inner workings of people - it cannot explore their minds so easily; however, the added visual and audio capabilities of film open whole new areas of the imagination which, in the hands of a competent writer-director, can more than compensate.
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.
Romeo and Juliet is William Shakespeare's timeless tale about two 'star crossed lovers'. It was originally written in the 16th century and was thoroughly enjoyed by its audience in that era. When comparing the movie adaptation of Romeo and Juliet directed by Baz Luhrmann to the original Shakespeare text, many differences are evident. Through the imaginative use of modernization, Baz Luhrmann makes it appealing to a 21st Century audience. Luhrmann captures the aspects in Shakespeare’s text to suit the present-day viewer, through the help of features such as: mise-en-scene, camera-work, editing and sounds. By paying incredible attention to every detail, Luhrmann assures that the tale of ancient grudge, fate and love was made entirely accessible to the younger generation. Within the essay, I will be contemplating on these features and furthermore, will discuss how they engage the modern audience.
Rascaroli, Laura. "The Essay Film: Problems, Definitions, Textual Commitments." Framework: The Journal of Cinema and Media 49.2 (2008): 24-47. JSTOR. Web. 08 May 2014.
Brownlow, Kevin 1994, ‘Preface’, in Paolo, C, Burning Passions: an introduction to the study of silent film, British Film Institute, London: BFI, pp. 1-3.
Since the creation of films, their main goal was to appeal to mass audiences. However, once, the viewer looks past the appearance of films, the viewer realizes that the all-important purpose of films is to serve as a bridge connecting countries, cultures, and languages. This is because if you compare any two films that are from a foreign country or spoken in another language, there is the possibility of a connection between the two because of the fact that they have a universally understanding or interpretation. This is true for the French New Wave films; Contempt and Breathless directed by Jean-Luc Godard, and contemporary Indian films; Earth and Water directed by Deepa Mehta. All four films portray an individual’s role in society using sound and editing.
With the discovery of techniques such as continuous editing, multiple camera angles, montage editing, and more, silent filmmaking developed from simple minute-long films to some of the most beautiful, awe-inspiring films that have ever been created—in only a few decades. In Visions of Light, someone alluded that if the invention of sound had come along a mere ten years later, visual storytelling would be years ahead of what it is today. This statement rings true. When looking at the immense amount of progress that was made during the silent era of films, one must consider where the art of film has been, where it is, and where it is
The use of sound has been greatly developed and is now considered as "one of the richest sources of meaning in film art." (Giannetti, 2002). When sound in film is being examined, two positions must be assumed; digetic sound and non-digetic sound. These positions relate to the basis of the sound in film and television. For example, digetic sound refers to the sound that materialises inside the creation of the film (if a character h...
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.