There is a book and a movie called The Lovely Bones. The movie is good to watch and the book is great to read. The movie is a little different from the book. Altogether it’s about a girl named Susie who gets murdered. In the movie it doesn’t show Susie getting murdered. In the book they had Susie’s funeral but it doesn’t show that in the movie either. The book explains more than the movie. Franny is Susie’s counselor in heaven but she isn’t in the movie. The movie and book show the family and what they are going through. The book is more interesting than the movie because it tells way more. The book is a little better than the movie. The book gives a lot more detail than the movie. In the movie they don’t show everything that was explained
in the book. The book is way easier to understand. The movie and the book had their similarities and their differences. The movie is good but the book is better. Both story lines made sense in the movie and the book. In the end they were both interesting.
This is my view on the movie and book. I likes the movie better the book because 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.
The movie, unlike the book, starts in chronological order. The book starts from Susie’s death and then flashbacks to what happened before. Another difference is that the bracelet charm in the movie is not the Pennsylvania keystone, but a house. Also, even though some things happen in both, book and movie, not every time the reasons are the same. For example
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.
In the story of The Lovely Bones there were differences between the movie and the book. The first point is in the book, Susie's heaven had Franny as her mentor, but in the movie in Susie heaven there was no mention of a person named Franny. The second point is that Jack had a heart attack in the book, but he did not have one in the movie. The Third point is that Ruth moved to New York in the book, but in the movie she was still a teenager in her hometown of Pennsylvania were
The book and the movie were both very good. The book took time to explain things like setting, people’s emotions, people’s traits, and important background information. There was no time for these explanations the movie. The book, however, had parts in the beginning where some readers could become flustered.
The movie was way more different than the book. More event happened in the book than in the movie. In the book Susie get caught up at school and is late for dinner. In the book Abigail Susie’s mom had an affair with one of the detectives. The book also said there was a fair and in the movie there was nothing about a fair. The book didn’t say anything about Lindsey falling and struggling to get up. Also the book didn’t say anything about Lindsey grabbing the
When I first heard about Lovely Bones, I was immediately intreged by the entire story and idea of the book. In the first chapter I was introduced to a lovely girl named Susie Salmon. She was just your average happy girl who was going through her teenage years. Sadly one night she was led away from her original trail home, and ended up getting raped and murdered by her neighnour Mr.Harvey. Harvey is a very sick man who obviouslyy knew what he was doing and after killing the poor girl, he cut up her body and ended up throwing her parts in a safe and throwing that down the large sink hole (except her elbow that a dog found). Her parents are devistated and while they try to move on, her father sets out to find the killer, and he actually knows who did the horrific deed, but has no proof other than a “fathers
As she ascends into the new world, the shadows remain persistent. Amy Tan’s The Bonesetter’s Daughter, demonstrates the main character, LuLing’s, escapade into Americanism but it is coupled with the benevolent remembrance of her quondam home. Throughout the novel, LuLing’s difficulty with settling in America cultivates through her cultural assimilation and familial relationships. She undergoes the tragedies from the absence of communication, her literal “voicelessness,” as well as her family’s exodus--all the while she bestows endearment for her family.
To me, the book is tremendously better than the motion picture. It panders a bit, it does not have a strong antagonist and the plot could have been tighter, yet it is a genuine, straightforward
One difference between the book and the movie is the way that Susie acts. In the book, she acts like a little girl and as if she doesn't have much experience in the real world and with predators. In the book if they hadn't mentioned how old she was I would have guessed she was
The Lovely Bones was written in 2002 by Alice Seabold. This novel is a story about a teenage girl, named Susie who was raped and murdered by a neighbor nobody suspected. Throughout the novel she observed her family and friends struggle to move on from her personal Heaven. Also, many themes were present throughout the novel including morality, violence, love, family, etc.
The lovely bones is an excruciatingly boring book, the character development and plot is painstakingly weak, the story revolves around the rape and murder of a teenage girl by the name of Suzie salmon. The book tries to show the effects of the main character Suzie’s death and attempts to make the reader feel empathetic, personally I didn’t feel any emotions towards the characters, Suzie’s father Jack was a boring generic character and her mother Abigail literally served no other purpose than to further the tension and start a sub plot. The movie was cast poorly and though some scenes were very aesthetically pleasing they lacked substance and more often I felt bored, I found the actors to be mediocre at best. For these reasons I believe that
So which is better, the book or the movie? People have been analyzing this since the beginning of book-to-film adaptations. But let us see for ourselves which is better, by using The Giver as an example. The Giver is the story of a boy named Jonas. He lives in a community where everything is controlled and there is no such thing as real emotion. Jonas is then chosen by the Community to do a special job and that’s how a series of events start to unfold as Jonas realises the truth about his world.There are many differences between the movie The Giver and the book.
I cannot say that I prefer the novel over the movie. The novel has so much more story that was not placed into the film. I watched them movie before reading the book so I already had a preconceived idea of the characters. The novel leaves so much more to the imagination and really paints the dark picture of what it must have been like for people during this era in the South during the Civil War. The movie does a fantastic job as well but I don’t think it is as in depth, which is expected because of the length of the novel. The novel is over 1,000 pages and the film is 238 minutes, making it the longest movie at the time it was released, (1939). There are some very notable di...