Imagine that you just had your first daughter. From the moment you lay your eyes on her you can’t help but be overrun with joy and happiness. She grows up like a normal child, curious and playful. But one day she changes, she’s no longer vibrant and full of life. You then notice what seem like bruises on her back and take her to the hospital. The doctors there observe that she has a low white blood cell count and recommend that you see an oncologist as a precautionary measure. The diagnosis you receive is one you never could have expected; she leukemia. How far would you go and what would you do in order to keep her alive? The motion picture “My Sister’s Keeper” sets out to put you into this position and does not fail in making you feel every tear jerking moment.
Brian and Sara Fitzgerald, played by Jason Patric and Cameron Diaz, are faced with this troubling dilemma. Their daughter Kate is suffering from acute promyelocytic leukemia causing her to need blood transfusions but neither of them are compatible donors. Sara immediately asks the doctor whether their son could be a donor and the doctor replies he is not, but if they were to have another child he or she could be. He “recommends” that they look into creating a baby that would be genetically identical to Kate. At this suggestion Mr. Fitzgerald questions whether this would be correct considering that they would be giving birth to an individual in order to just sustain another’s life. His wife overpowers him on the subject and she eventually gives birth to Anna Fitzgerald, a designer baby.
What are Designer Babies?
Anna and babies like her are not made from the miracle of consummation but rather in a laboratory. In the movie, doctors took sperm cells from Mr. Fitzger...
... middle of paper ...
...ry emotion that her character felt, she portrayed immaculately causing the audience to feel the same way. The other actors and actresses also gave stellar performances adding to the realistic nature of the story. The soundtrack also further enhanced the story by increasing the tension and emotions felt throughout the film.
After watching the film it is also evident that director Nick Cassavetes took some liberties with the plot of the story. He essentially changes the ending and removes most of the interactions between Anna and her lawyer, one of the most dynamic relationships in the novel. I for one did not like this decision but overall the movie did live up to the expectations set by the novel. I give this movie 3.5 out 4 stars and recommend it to all my readers.
Works Cited
IMDb, . N.p.. Web. 12 Nov 2013. .
Maddie Brown of Sister Wives is already engaged, but this hasn't all aired on the show yet. Us Magazine shared a preview of the upcoming season of Sister Wives where Maddie Brown will tell the family all about her big engagement. In this preview, the family is all at Janelle's house so they can hear this great news from Maddie. Kody explains that Madison has been visiting Caleb and just got back.
This is my view on the movie and book. I likes the movie better the book because the
Secondly, the book has no character in place of Mituba and so it greatly makes her existence in the movie questionable. She is usually only seen spying on Hester, like what is are we supposed to interpret from that. Unlike in the novel, the movie we find out is being narrated by Pearl (Arthur and Hester's child) rather than the by the author like in the book. The end too is much different than that of the book where no war takes place. So the book that is said to be an adaption of the movie greatly contradicts and differentiates from it. It is a Rated R movie and has nudity and sexually explicit
...ow well they played the part and told the story. Of course, like other directors Lisa Cholodenko wanted recognizable actors in order to achieve a more grand recognition for her work.
Honestly I thought that the movie had such a simple story but at the same time it is so complex. The way it was delivered it was amazing, it's such a moving film. The actor’s were amazing, there isn’t anything I would want to change about this film. I would 100% recommend this movie to anyone, its so inspiring and it really makes you think.
The movie is, most likely, done well enough to intrigue its intended audience. It captured the theme and story line of the book. It falls short, though, when compared to the beautiful, sensitive and contemplative prose of Natalie Babbitt. One could only hope that a viewing of the film will lead the watcher to try the book and be delighted all the more.
...said, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." Another striking difference between the movie and the book is that both are developed by different sexes. This obviously could effect the compare and contrast views of this paper. For example, being male, I found that the two images that left the greatest impression were of sexual nature, Gertrudis making love with the soldier, and Tita being intimate with Pedro. The different views of the sexes may also be the answer to some of the contrasts between the movie and novel. For instance, the death of Mama Elena. Esquirel’s version fits the emotional death, suicide, geared toward the female audience, while Arau’s shows a more sexual and violent death, extinguishing the male desire for action. In conclusion, I found the novel more entertaining than the movie. The reason the movie fell short in expectations is because Esquirel does a great job in allowing the reader to draw on their imaginations. However, Arau is able to capture this imagery occasionally throughout the movie. Furthermore, most of the changes added to the movie were grand, which added to the thrill and plot of the story. Overall, both are memorable and deserve their legacy.
I did not like the ending of the story. I found that the ending was very predictable and anticlimactic, especially when all the tension was being built up throughout the rest of the book. When I was nearing the end of the book I was already starting to envision the ending of the book and when I got to the end I was disappointed to see that I was correct. I would have preferred if the ending was more of a cliff-hanger and ended completely different than anyone would have expected.
because it made me became very curious about what is going to happen next. The play’s beginning was no as interesting as the movie’s. I also liked the acting in the movie.
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.
Overall, the score was beautiful and appropriate, adding suspense and mystery at all the right times. The sound effects added psychological flavor to the story without drawing too much attention to it.
This movie was inspiring and encouraging to anyone who is struggling with something. Overcoming his controversies in life became the main point of the movie. Knowing that this movie was based upon a true story inspires the people even more.
...ing message and provide an emotional punch to equal the book's resonance, which would have probably made a longer film, but added to the continuity if the film.
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.
It was around ten o’ clock at night when Karen’s roommate walked into the bathroom and realized Karen was giving birth. She heard a gush of water that sounded like water breaking followed by a baby’s cries. She then heard the toilet being flushed several times. Karen was trying to get rid of the mistake she had made. When