In every English class when you read a book you will also then watch the movie to compare and contrast the differences. Every English teacher will say the book is always better than the movie. Of Mice and Men is an outstanding novel with a great movie to follow. There are always some differences between the book and movie and I will compare and contrast these differences in this essay. There are many similarities and many differences between the book and the movie. In the movie Of Mice and Men there are over 15 differences. For example, the first major difference from the book and the movie is at the end of the in the movie George does not hesitate to kill Lennie, but in the book it was very hard to shoot him. He first aimed the gun at Lennie and then put the gun down but he had to put the gun back to Lennie head. That is a major part because George hesitating to shoot causes suspense and sorrow. George‘s best friend that he has been through everything with and he has to kill him. The director changed this scene to change the tone and outcome of the movie. The book had a better ending than the movie because it makes you feel depressed also the movie did not get as intense as the book did, because the director explained the outcome a different way. …show more content…
The movie has a flash forward scene of George on a train, but the book has him talking to Slim about getting a drink and had nothing about a train. The director did a great job of explaining the emotions of George that he had at the time. The director did this so we would feel more depressed that George killed Lennie but the book is trying to cheer you up by George going with Slim to get a drink at the bar. I was surprised at how amazing the book was compared to the
Relationships can be a positive aspect in a person 's life. There are many significant attributes about relationships in the movie Rain Man by Ronald Bass that are comparable to the story Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck. Both of these stories are good examples of how relationships teach people how to be supportive and accepting. These stories also teach us about how spending time with a person brings you closer together and how over time the characters in the two stories learn the true value of friendship. It is apparent through both of these stories that a considerable part of most relationships are made up of support for one another.
Many films are criticized to be way different from the book and therefore not as good. The movie Of Mice and Men, however, is very well done and very similar to the book. In this movie were elements that created mood and atmosphere, elements that made the movie good, and elements/ things that could have been improved in order to reflect the novel better.
John Steinbeck, the author, wrote the novel “Of Mice and Men” in 1937. The novel soon had two films encompassing it. One was made in 1939 and another in 1992. This paper will reference to the movie produced by Gary Sinise in 1992 and his vision of the story for the character. For the main plot by Sinise, is it very similar in how it was laid out by Steinbeck. However, the way the characters were executed in the film was what brought me to make the conclusions that the movie was not as great as the novel. The role of Crooks in the cinema has very poor development and was just a representation that black men were part of the 1930’s. Curley’s wife did not have a flare to her in the movie either; she is seen as more sympathetic than anything, which
J.F Clarke said that "The bravest of individuals is the one who obeys his or her conscience". This statement means that the special people, who listen to their conscience, are the bravest because it is not easy to listen and act on what your conscience tells you because many people are afraid of the consequences of doing so. In The Lord of the Flies, by William Golding, and Of Mice and Men, by John Steinbeck, the characters truly do show this trait of being brave. I agree with the statement because I know myself that it isn't easy to act on what your conscience tells you. Many times the consequences stop me and also it is very hard to base a decision on pure "instinct".
The book and the movie are both very different, yet they are also the same in a few ways. In the book they had different characters, then the movie. In the movie they had gotten rid of some of the characters and then added new ones. The theme in the movie and the book is the same.
Instead of the story starting on George and Lennie’s walk from the bus to the ranch, the movie starts in Weed, showing how Lennie grabbed the woman’s dress and they were soon after chased into hiding. Whereas, in the book the story of their escape from Weed came up when Slim asks why they left. Also, the bus did not go by again to drop people off down the road. Later in the film adaptation, Curley’s wife does not go into the barn during Lennie’s and Crooks’s conversation, nor do they bring up Lennie and George’s dream farm. At the end of the movie, when George shoots Lennie there is no hesitation, but in the book Lennie went through the whole story before George shot him.
Many films have blurred the true message of the book in which it is based on. I believe the motion picture Of Mice and Men does not fall into this category, I do feel as if elements of the novella were lost within the film by cutting and adding seances. This took away key moments between characters that lead to the development of the overall conclusion of the story. However, by keeping many similarities and adding several changes that enhanced the story which allowed viewers to appreciate the storyline more and added depth to the film that was missing from the book.
The movie of Of Mice and Men had many differences while still giving the same message that the book was portrayed to have. One of the major differences was that Candy never came into the room when Lennie and Crooks were talking to each other. This was major because Crooks never found out that the plan was true about the little house. In the book after he heard Candy talk about it he wanted to get in on the deal. Also the movie it never showed Lennie have his illusions of his Aunt Carla and the rabbits when he was waiting by the pond.
George and Lennie were cousins. This movie was film during the great depression time. During this time there was no work, food, or water. They were also two friends that were trying to find a job and they got one. They most of the time stayed together. They got to Tyler Ranch and ask for a job. They both got a job and started working. They worked on a farm, cutting the weeds, picking up the grain. There was this guy that was threatening Lennie but George was there to protect him. They both protect each other when something bad is gonna happen. Lennie had a problem which was that he would get mad and could not control himself. Because of his problem a lot of bad things happened. Things such as killing a puppy and the boss son's wife. He almost
When turning a novel into a film there are bound to be changes made, some bigger than others. There are many reasons for alterations to be made but sometimes these changes have an effect on how the audience perceives the movie. The novella, Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck, was turned into a film by Gary Sinise but, there were notable changes made to the film. Sinise’s decision to alter the scene in Crooks’ room results in a loss of character development, seen in characters Crooks, Curley's wife, and Candy. All three of these characters were strongly constructed in the novel and by leaving out this key scene in the film, the viewers are left with a lack of better understanding of these characters.
John Locke’s idea that “no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possession” appears idealistic in John Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men. Although this thought should be strived for by humanity, Steinbeck’s use of a mentally handicapped character, Lennie, shows mankind’s inequality and lack of forgiveness towards a man who has no self control. Because Lennie lacks necessary mental functions, he causes harm to other beings, which causes the society to wish Lennie’s life harm. Unlike John Locke’s belief in the “no harm to life,” Steinbeck’s novel heavily focuses on the contrary.
The novel “Of Mice and Men” by John Steinbeck , is about these two men who travel together for work. The setting of this novel is taken place during the great depression. John Steinbeck wrote 27 books in his lifetime. His books are widely read abroad and many of his works are considered classics of Western Literature. His work mainly focuses on exploring themes such as fate, and injustice. It is not right to kill animals or humans without their consent. The main character of this novel is George. George is the more of a mature man, Lennie is a bit different but that’s okay. When Lennie likes something he has the urge to want to touch it. One day there was this beautiful lady who was wearing a red dress, Lennie loved the dress. When he tried to touch it the lady got scared and ran. So George and Lennie fled. Everywhere George and Lennie go to travel for work there would
Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck is a detailed description of two men who have the dream of becoming more than farmhands in the great depression. They realize early on they cannot do it without each other, and they know they will always stick together. George Milton is a small and mildly educated man who wants to own his own farm one day. With him is his childhood friend, Lennie Small. A large man with incredible work ethic despite his intellectual disability that affects his memory on a daily basis. Lennie consistently relies on George for his common sense and judgement, but not without Geroge relying on his impressive strength and always consistent work ability.
The modern period was a time of changing and individualism. Modern Literature usually reflected the life of the people of that time. Some of the artists of this time were affected by “The Great War” or World War II. These authors, poets, painters, etc. would go off in the shock of this war and try and find some light and some hope. One can see the tragedy and the sadness that some of these artists went through, in their works. For example, a change of color in an artist’s paint, a sway to the darker side of things in the imagery and word choice of poets, and most of all, authors writing tragic novels. Two of the types of novels that they wrote were modern tragic and Aristotelian tragic.
One of the most obvious changes being in that the book is understandably vastly wordy in comparison to the film, which is wordless at points, and deeply internal. The novel takes place almost completely inside the characters heads, which turn out to be overly complex and complicated, which was understandably one of the hardest elements to convert to the screen. What the novel depicts through long sentences, paragraphs, and long scenes, the film concludes in one angry stare or longing glance – showing the audience what a certain character is thinking, and how they may behave as the story continues. It takes the reader some time to ease into McEwan's complex structural pattern and slow, considered pacing. The film on the other hand, with its extended silent pauses, excess dialogue, and striking images, make it more accessible.