Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
cinema and its impact on society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: cinema and its impact on society
“Born on the Fourth of July”
This book was incredible! In all truth this was the first book I have ever read cover to cover. The book, by Ron Kovic, as compared to the film, by Oliver Stone, had some impressive similarities. Both the book and the film did a great job of portraying Ron’s childhood in Massapequa, Long Island. From the little league games to playing war in the woods, leading charges and setting ambushes. This was especially well done in the movie, and exactly as I pictured them while reading the book. The time that he spent in Mexico was well defined in the book as well as in the film. While there were many similarities, what I feel is more important is to focus on the differences.
There were countless small differences in the film as compared to the book, things such as shuffling the order in which chapters appeared in the film. For example, the beginning of the film took a different path than the beginning of the book. In the book the first chapter set the tone for the rest of the book, describing the firefight and all that had gone wrong, Burning into your mind the thought of Ron Kovic lying on the ground bleeding, paralyzed, screaming for help and hearing people get shot all around him. The beginning of the film is a different story all together. It gives you hope, it lulls you into believing that this is a happy story, the kind where everything always works out in the end. It is not until after the entire buildup of the character, after you feel as if you know him, that you see this scene. The accidental killing of the civilians, the baby, the killing of the corporal, all these things happen before you find out that this soldier, this Marine, will come home paralyzed.
The film makes it a point to show that there was an on-going, pseudo romance between Ron and Joan Marfe. The two of them kissing on his birthday, Ron running to the prom and showing up soaking wet, asking her for a dance. Finding her after the war and going to a protest with her. None of these things were anywhere in the book, in fact the book only mentioned her once, and in that mentioning Ron said that he was always too nervous to ask her for a date. The film completely leaves out Ron’s marriage to Helen and his entire time in California.
As for the reasons that Ron joined the Marine core there were some interesting and important differences. The film leads you to belie...
... middle of paper ...
...girl whom he has known since first grade. The book mentions a girl like this, once, but she has a different name, and Ron doesn’t ever talk to her. Also, the entire prom scene seemed to be made up to aid in the progression of the love story, sounds like dramatic license or artistic freedom to me.
There were quite a few other books mentioned in “History by Hollywood”, but I felt that they were all portrayed and critiqued fairly. I found it reassuring that Toplin was more concerned about educating the reader that movies were a good thing for history, while they are not always completely accurate, they do expand the minds of the people viewing them. If it was not for “Pearl Harbor” or “Saving Private Ryan”, an entire generation could have forgotten about World War II. I would even go as far as to say that in 50 years there will be a movie such as “Pearl Harbor” about the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center. Movies are an important part of our lives, they can be used as a teaching tool, or as a means of remembrance, but they will always be used. I just hope that the people watching them don’t take them as fact, but take them as a basis to learn more about what really happened.
Second there is more detail in the book than the movie. Well, I think that more detail is better because the more you know the better you understand the movie or
As I read the novel, I couldn’t help but to compare each word to the movie. I may have just recently watched it, but I was suddenly unsure of what I had seen. Was my memory failing me or were things truly that different? I felt like these differences changed the entire story line. The narrator shouldn’t be in a building that was about to be destroyed, this defeated the purpose of Project Mayhem. Then again, I was only on page one.
Though the events and a lot of the dialogue are the same in both the book and the movie the crux of the two are completely different. The book focuses a lot more on sexual tension and sexual exploration. The...
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.
For all the differences the film had from the novel, it was basically the same story just told in a more cheerful way and was more about the Joad family. However, the differences did not take away from the film; they might have made the film even better. No matter how different the film was from the novel, they both have succeeded in their own respective fields and remain classics to this
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...
...oon fairly accurately, despite some major differences. The movie focuses more on certain things and less than others than the book does. There are also parts that are in the book or the movie, but not in the other. The movie talks more about Lovell’s family life, and less on his childhood and earlier career than the book does. These things are not very significant to the plot. The main plot is kept pretty much intact, and the ending is obviously not changed. Most people knew how the movie would end, because it was a very publicized historical event. That is likely why they add so much about Lovell’s and the other crewmembers’ families. This makes the movie more interesting, because it makes it more personalized, and not just a technical description of the mission. It was very interesting to watch the movie after having read the book and compare the two.
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.
I don’t like the movie as much as I like the book because the movie doesn’t really demonstrate the futuristic world that the author depicted. It disappoints me because, like I’ve said earlier, the setting of the story is what interested me the most. But the movie, unfortunately, was not able to convey it. And I didn’t expect the movie to create a futuristic world either because back in 1966, technology was not advanced. Aside from technological issues, there are some changes in the movie. In the book, the girl who inspires Guy Montag, Clarisse McClellan, dies due to a speeding car, but in the movie, she still lives. I personally prefer the book’s way because I think Clarisse’s death was a key factor in leading to the main conflict of the book. Overall, I think that the book is far more interesting than the movie because the book is just more descriptive and
Of the many changes made between the book and the movie, most were made to keep the audience interested in the story. Most people who watch TV don’t have a long attention span. Executives at NBC didn’t want to spend millions to produce a movie and then have nobody watch it. The screenwriters had to throw in some clever plot twists to keep people interested. Another reason the movie was different from the book was the material in the book was a little too racy for network TV. Take the ending, for example, nobody wants to see a grown man hang himself. This was a reason the producers had to change some material in the movie.
There are a lot of differences between the book and the movie ‘Ender’s Game’ even though the storyline is somewhat the same in the movie, and like half of the characters from the book were in the movie. The movie was still very different from the book.
The book is some what different from the movie. There are many differences between the book and the movie. Like when PonyBoy and Johnny went to the movie theater Pony wished that he was big and buff like the guy in the movie. “I was wishing I looked like Paul Newman-he looks tough and I don’t
In the book and in the movie, many aspects showed major similarities and differences. This includes the similarities and differences in location, perspective of the conflict, perspective in conveying the horrors of the genocide, and comparisons in personal conflicts that both characters went through. While the movie made a great attempt to convey the massacre, the book was written in a more common reality from an actual survivor of the genocide compared to the movie, which used actors and centered the events more on Paul as to entertain the audience. The book held a personal account which separates it from the movie, but blends in with some main ideas and messages that the movie tried to express.
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.
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.