Without ... ... middle of paper ... ...e book, Elizabeth is depicted as being sweet and intelligent, while in the book, she was depicted as being sometimes rude. A big difference between the book and the movie is that in the book, Darcy and Elizabeth were always surrounded by others, but in the movie, they could be found being by themselves a lot. This difference could be very pivotal to the meaning of the book. In the movie and book Pride and Prejudice, there are differences from the movie and the book. Some of the differences between the movie and the novel can be a direct cause of Joe Wright having his own opinions in regards to how he believes the message should be depicted.
However, perceptions between the two differ from even each other. As Lupack says: In asserting an adaptation we are not really comparing book with film but rather interpretation with interpretation - the novel that we ourselves have recreated in our imaginations, out of which we have constructed our own individualized “movie,” and the novel on which the filmmaker has worked a parallel transformation. (10) Although we do have our different perceptions about the novel and the story within it, these perceptions are, more or less, similar to each other. As these only vary so much from each other, they can still be a considerably veritable basis of comparison for the two versions of this story, the versions focused on being the novel and the the film. When comparing between our variations, we can compare the changes to see “how much of written work’s plot and characterization has been translated into the new medium, how comprehensive and intelligent an understanding of the original (its strengths, its weaknesses) underlies the translation” (Hunter 159).
Every other movie today seems to be taken from a novel. This is not necessarily terrible, but there are a few guidelines when it comes to converting a novel into film. The utmost critical aspect is preserving the theme. Theme is the large and small ideas which aid in explaining the actions and events in a work of literature or film. This can be accomplished through the handling of characters and their relationships with others or their own morals and values.
However, a film can give a limited visual representation of the author’s story, characters, setting, and theme. Sometimes directors can change the story to fit their vision, ruining the author’s original story. Books occur to be better than movies because
The book also has more suspense while the movie moves too fast and cuts out scenes. The movie moving too fast causes it to be very predictable. Three major differences that stood out include missing characters and characters perceived differently, essential scenes left out and the way the book shows individual people while the movie shows the relationships in action. The book versus the movie shows clear differences but the morals are all still the same. ... ... middle of paper ... ... To say both the book and the movie of To Kill a Mockingbird were closely related would be an understatement.
The first main difference was Asher and Fiona's Assignments. This was an important difference because when changing their Assignments, they were able to help Jonas in the movie. The second main difference was a similarity between all Receivers. In the book, they similarly used light eyes to define the Receiver of Memory, but in the movie, it was having a certain birthmark. The final difference was the Chief Elder's role.
Both have to do with the same plot, but there are many differences between the movie and play as well as similarities between the movie and play. 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).
The plot in the film is very similar to the book but in parts, especially towards the end, the plot is slightly different to the film. The plot is varied in the film to show
Comparison of Ethan Hawke and Kenneth Branagh's Versions of Hamlet Modern day directors use a variety of methods to hold ones interest. Ethan Hawke and Kenneth Branagh’s created versions of Hamlet that shared some similarities, but ultimately had many differences in respects to an audience’s appeal. An appealing movie is one that has an alluring ambiance and an intellectual stimulus. With these two movie versions, a setting and a mood forced an audience to acquire specific emotions, but Ethan Hawke’s version generated emotions more strongly and effectively. Also, these movies had extremely different uses of music and visuals, but both movie versions incorporated them well for the ambiance it tried to obtain.
Although the titles of the two works are relatively similar, the plot of each is different. If the film does not include the character, Ichabod Crane, and the reference to a Headless Horseman, the film would have no resemblance to Irving’s story. The difference in structure of plot in the two works changes the entire story. Every facet of the story is different between the two. The exposition offers the audience different stories because Ichabod has a new profession in the movie.