More handpicked essays just for you.
Tennessee williams life and work
Best essay talking about tennessee williams
Tennessee williams life and work
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
A play, The Glass Menagerie, was written by Tennessee Williams in 1944. Many films have been produced after this play was published. An example of these films would be the one produced in 1987 by Paul Newman. There are many similarities in addition to differences between the play and the film. To begin with, the similarities were pretty noticeable throughout the film and the play. First, almost all the lines were exactly the same in both the film and the play. Furthermore, just like in the play the transition/cut between acts was noticeable in the film. Lastly, according to the play, all the narration parts were added to the movie. Moving onto the significant differences between the two. Imagery, body language, mood, and tone are all important literature elements that could be portrayed better in the film. This is due to the fact that the (written) play depends more on imagination. On the other hand, the film relies more on the audience’s senses. Tom's and Amanda relationship occurred to be stronger in the movie than it was explained in the play. The atmosphere in the movie is rather ill and boring than it is in the play. When it comes to lighting, it was more dim in the play to reflect a memory. In the film, it wasn't as dimmed because the memory could be reflected in different ways. Moreover, images, that were flashed in a screen device, did not exist in the film. In the movie, the atmosphere was more boring and ill than it was in the play. …show more content…
The ability of (actors) using eye contact, vocal cords, posture, and facial expressions could never be portrayed in any written play. Music could be used to target different audience and how the feel about certain things throughout the plot. As a result, the film had an advantage when it came to background music and
These changes in the film make the plot more comprehendible to the viewer, and overall make the film more realistic to the viewer than the play does for the
The play was complete in itself being that it led the reader to use his or her imagination to put together all of the complexities of their interactions. That being said, I would recommend the film over the written play because of how powerful the messages shown by the actors through body language are. They brought a level of depth to the message that the original author was unable to achieve.
During the play there were a lot of differences and similarities compared to the stories. I will list some differences and then I will list the similarities. There were a lot of changes in the play’s than the stories such as the setting, characters, props, and how they act or their emotions.
Another difference that was instantly apparent in the movie was the absence of the images that pop up every couple of pages during the play. I think the absence of these images slightly undermines the aura of unreality. The presence of the images represents dreams and imagination, which we know are made up, fantasy. The absence of the dreamlike images helps us forget what Tom says at beginning of the play, "the play is memory. Being a memory play, it is dimly lighted, it is sentimental, it is not realistic."
Even though the themes were similar, the plot of the movie and the play were rather different. In the movie, Mercutio, Romeo’s friend, got an invitation to Lord Caplet’s ball where Romeo and Juliet meet, but in the movie Romeo and this friends go to Lord Capulet’s party uninvited. What's more, is that when Romeo was at the ball he was recognized by Tybalt, Juliet’s cousin, from the sound of his voice in the play, but in the movie Tybalt sees him. In addition to that one scene where Juliet was hysterical because she thought Romeo was dead was completely absent in the movie.
Now in the play in act 5 a total of four of the characters died but in the movie only two died in Act 5. The only real similarities are that Romeo and Juliet die and Balthazar told Romeo that Juliet died. At the same time the differences are that in the movie Romeo never went to the apothecary witch in the play he did. Also In the movie when Romeo and Balthasar went to the Capulet tomb Romeo never gave his servant the reason why he did go into the tomb and he opened the tomb with a boulder but in the play he told Balthasar that he was going to give juliet a final kiss and retrieve a ring from her. Romeo also opened the tomb the a iron crowbar. And the biggest Difference was that Lady Montague died from grief but in the movie she lived and Romeo never fought Parris in the movie at the Capulet
There is other little differences that I noticed added to the story that were in the movie and not the play. There are several scenes where Mother superior is interacting with Sister Veronica. Because of some of these scenes you see another side of Sister Aloysius that presents a more compassionate lady not so wrapped up in doubt. Although Sister Aloysius comes off as a strict woman that really has no sympathy for anyone or anything, which kind of makes you question how the heck she ended up as a nun. In the movie you can clearly see that she has a softer side and actually is hiding behind that tough façade she puts up.
The unlikely pair of “The Glass Menagerie” by Tennessee Williams and “A Doll House” by Henrik Ibsen do share multiple similarities in their domestic situations and in the things they chose to do. . When comparing these two plays you also have to keep in mind about how that both the plays were done in different time periods. Therefore things are going to be different when it comes to the roles of the women. With the “The Glass Menagerie” and “A Doll House” all the characters have flaws, lived in different time period, felt like they were trapped in ways, and reacted to things differently.
The Glass Menagerie is an eposidic play written by Tennesse Williams reflecting the economic status and desperation of the American people in the 30s.He portrays three different characters going through these hardships of the real world,and choosing different ways to escape it.Amanada,the mother,escapes to the memories of the youth;Tom watches the movies to provide him with the adventure he lacks in his life;and laura runs to her glass menagerie.
There is no doubt that Lawrence Olivier's version does a better job of sticking with the letter of the play, bringing us all the richness of the Elizabethan dialogue and costume, allowing us to experience the events as they happened.
As humans, we are all born by those who raised us such as families and guardians. Family is where we all belong in that helps us identify who we are as an individual. It helps us grow as a person in order to realize what we have located in front of us. We all belong to a family and it is our family that keeps us together through thick and thin. Without having a family, the person feels isolated and the relationship that ties the family together tears apart. We need others who are close in our lives in order to function properly with those we are surrounded by day in and out. From The Glass Menagerie the play by Tennessee Williams and movie by Paul Newman, shows lower-middle class family living in an apartment in St. Louis. In the play, The
Another difference that is noticed right away, is that Quincey Morris, and Arthur Holmwood (later Lord Godalming), are not in the play. Dietz probably decided that too many male characters on the stage would just confuse the audience. It would have been fine, except that they (Quincey and Arthur) were both mentioned in the first act. If Dietz had just deleted those characters fully then it would not have been so confusing. (Note: Dietz may have felt it was necessary to mention Holmwood, because otherwise why would Lucy turn down Dr. Seward when he asked her to marry her. However, there was no need to mention Quincey Morris if he was not part of the story).
...om that point on the play began to slow down and unravel the conflicts. This was a play I which everything happened very quickly. The problem was presented right at the beginning, the conflict was established along with subsidiary conflicts resulting from our central conflict itself, and the was then resolved rather quickly. The theme of conflict was apparent throughout the play as well, and is the cause of the problems that befall the characters. Overall there was never really a difference or a change in the main idea or conflict or setting of the play to the film, besides a few content difference and alterations with he context and words of the play to the film, I believe that the film was a very good portrayal of the play, the plot and other literary elements used in drama. All were established and addressed the final resolve at the end in A Midsummer Night Dream.
The original drama and the 1996 movie production have more differences than similarities that can be seen in comparing them both. The scenes and the language in the movie are easier to understand than reading the play because of the modern day setting and the conversational use of Shakespeare's language. In the movie, the hatred that is held between the Montague and Capulet families and leads to the destruction of the love that is found between Romeo and Juliet is portrayed more clearly than in the play. The feud between the two families can be seen in the characters and the scenes compared in the play and the movie.
In conclusion, these stories are very similar in many ways. Out of all the themes that could be used to compare the two, the most important ones are hatred, manipulation and hatred. Hatred is disliking some one or something and there are many characters that dislike each other. Manipulation is using your creativity to come up with a way to get someone to believe something that is not true. Lastly, jealousy, which is wanting something that someone else has and doing things to get it which is what Iago did in the play and Fernand did in the movie.