More handpicked essays just for you.
Character analysis to kill a mockingbird
Characters in to kill a mockingbird essay
Characters in to kill a mockingbird essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
There are many differences between the book; To Kill a Mockingbird and the movie. Some differences are easy to spot and some aren’t. Many things that are in the book aren’t in the movie. Many of these things you don’t need, but are crucial to the plot of the book. Movies and books have differences and similarities, but many things in books MUST be included in the movie. In the beginning of the movie, it opens up with Scout singing and drawing/coloring. The first thing I noticed was the way the audience meets Dill in the book and the movie. In the book, we meet Dill relatively late and in the movie we meet him almost as soon as the movie starts. Dill is a key character and we don’t get to see that as much as I intended too. A few examples of that are his capabilities to act out plays, and tell magnificent stories. In the movie, we do not get to see how he performs these plays. This is one of the things I was disappointed in during the movie. To add to Dill’s amazing thinking of plays and games, the movie did not include the strip poker game. This gave an excellent lesson and moral to the reader’s of the book. “Matches are dangerous, but cards are deadly…” This quote was very meaningful and made people think about the true meaning of it. Matches can harm people but playing a card poker game, stakes are high and could involve money and peoples lives, if things go in the wrong way. This scene would be great for the movie and would put a more dramatic and meaningful look to the movie. This was an example of one of the things that that was a key part after reading the book and watching the movie that was left out. I thought Jem, slapping the Radley house was very important in the book. This part of the book showed us... ... middle of paper ... ... What really shocked me about a part that was left out in the movie was when Jem was punished to go help and understand Mrs. Dubose as a punishment. After Mrs. Dubose harassed Jem and Scout, he got tired of it and took out his anger on her most precious thing, her garden. I thought this was very important to the book and would be essential to the movie as well. This was one of the scenes that showed us that Jem was indeed “growing up.” It also introduced us to Dubose’s addiction to morphine and her attempt to stop and be, courageous, as Atticus said. I actually, after all the differences, believe this is the most important scene that was not in the movie. Overall, the movie and book have many differences and similarities, some more important than others. The story still is clear without many scenes from the book, but the movie would have more thought in it.
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...
Such as Gitl was not there at all as she was in the book. Yitzchak, Reuven, and Tziporah are all missing in the movie. Also their is Aaron, Hannah’s brother, who is not there. They were an important bunch of people that should have been included because I think they built the plot a lot better when they were there in the book. Plot was different too, important plot details in the book were left out of the movie such as different jobs in the camp. In the book there was a bunch of variety when it came to jobs such as sorting, cleaning, digging. In the movie there was only
The differences in the movie and the book might have been intentional. If audiences were to read the book, watch the movie, and reach conclusions, I think they would have great understanding of what’s inside them both. For example, a scene in the movie in which Atticus tells his children why it is a sin to kill a mockingbird was not in the book; from that scene, I inferred on how that became the initial title of the book. By using both resources, I was able to gather information and grasp its contents tighter.
To begin with, there are many similarities between the book and movie To Kill A Mockingbird. For example, Tom Robinson died in an attempt to escape from prison in both the book and the movie. In my opinion Tom's death was crucial to the original story, and I believe the movie would have been seen as over-sentimental if the scriptwriters had let him live. Another important similarity between the book and movie, is the mutual fascination between Arthur Radley and the children. Arthur, or Boo as the children called him, left them gifts such as dolls, a watch, and chewing gum in the hollow of a tree in his yard. The children made expeditions to the Radley house to look in the window just so they could catch a glimpse of Boo Radley. I believe this captivation was important to the story line because it was the main foundation of the children's imagination. A big part of the story was imagining Boo to be some kind of freak that came out at night to eat cats and squirrels. An additional similarity between the book and movie is the respect showed to Atticus by the African American community of Maycomb. They respected him for his courage, which by his definition meant, "It's when you know you're licked before you begin, but you begin anyway and you see it through no matter what. You rarely win, but sometimes you do."(112). I think the mutual respect between the African Americans and Atticus was important not only to Atticus, but also to his children. Their father and the sad story and memories of Tom Robinson taught them the wrongs of racism. I think if the movie producers had taken out the good relationship between Atticus and the African Americans, it would be taking away one of the most important themes of the story. There are many other significant similarities between the book and the movie.
Throughout the story, Jem and Scout experience different people, and grow up in the process, differentiating from the good and the bad. A major character in the lives of the children was Tom Robinson, who was found guilty for no apparent reason. Mrs. Dubose acted very intolerant towards the children, but in the end Jem learned some things very valuable from her. Boo Radley, our “mockingbird”, is revealed to be one of the good guys, like a silent savior. The children learn their lessons, as it can be seen when Scout acts like a lady when Jem is being a teenager, when Dill loses his innocence, and when Jem hits adolescence.
The similarities are quite apparent, the movie plot mainly follows the basic plot that the book took, leaving the viewer’s with a sense of accomplishment, as this is sometimes not achieved in the highest degree. Scout still has a brother, Jem. They both still meet Dill and have a few adventures with him throughout the film. Jem and Scout still have a single father, Atticus, having lost their mother many years ago. Calpunia is still their cook. And the whole story still has an overpowering sense of focusing on two main stories, Boo Radley (Arthur Radley) and Tom Robinson’s trial.
Now for the counterargument. Some people say that they enjoyed watching the movie after reading the book. They may say that they think the movie does follow the book, and that the characters and events are the same in both versions. However, they are wrong because there is plenty of evidence that says otherwise. The different scenes of the book and movie, and also the characters that are completely different and don’t follow the same path in the two different
Also within the book you get much more detail than what a movie could ever fit into it reasonably though leaving out intense scenes such as the knife fight between Rose Mary and Rex. The two often fought though some conflicts were left out or altered to fit the story line of the movie and not the book’s. Within the book reader engagement was higher with the knife scene though without being in the movie viewer’s captivity was
The characterization between the the novel and movie were alike; yet very different. In the novel, I imagined the characters wearing different clothes, I imaged them wearing dirtier, more raggedy clothing, because it was a old and worn down town. Also, being able to see the characters in the movie, provides a different perspective the reader doesn't get from the novel. I feel that Scout is a more developed character in the novel. She is used as the narrator, thus the stories in the novel are all based
To start off, the most noticeable difference between the film and the novel is the story's
“Don’t be afraid to change you may lose something good but you may gain something better,” this quote directly fits with the astonishing novel, To Kill A Mockingbird which contains many themes and messages for readers to take from. The real question to be asked is, does the movie have the same impact? This book is told through a flashback, by Jean Louise Finch also known as Scout who tells the story of her childhood in Maycomb, Alabama in the 1930s. Scout and her brother Jem have heard frightful stories about a misunderstood man named Boo Radley. This book allows readers to see what life was like back then and what the children had to go through growing up. This book shows the theme of innocence and how it can
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.
One major difference between the movie and book is the events that took place. One example is when Charly met Fay. This never happened in the movie. But in the movie, when he met her he let all of his inner feeling out into the open and had a great time. In the movie he only went away for awhile and even then he only had what seemed to be a few short flings. With Fay, Charly was able express himself to her. Another event that was changed was the little field trip Charly took to Boston. Charly never went on this trip to Boston in the book. It doesn’t really play an important role in the story but then why did Heynes make such a useless change?
One thing that can make a book good is characters. In the book, there were many more animals in the farm. The movie did not show many animals except for the main animals. Even thought this is a small difference, it can be noticeable. In the book, Mollie was a character.
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.