However, the film is dependent on the directors vision and audience has little say on how the story is portrayed. I would rather read novels than watch films because novels provide better story experiences for their audiences through its increased creative freedom through imagination, lack of time limits, increased exposure, and the social experience it provides. I will be using two novels turned films for my analysis of this topic. I will be using examples from Golding's The Lord of the Flies and Morr... ... middle of paper ... ...lling stories than films. Novels are better than films because they give their audience complete creative control over how they visualize the story.
Authors and movie producers often have different ideas about how to portray a subject, in this case, the beloved story of The Giver. When you compare the two versions of The Giver, the novel and the movie, you will find very apparent and important differences not only in the plot, but in the characters and setting as well. When reading a novel, you visualize the perfect setting, trying to recreate that perfect setting as a director can be a strenuous and difficult task. To begin, the members of the community, both in the novel and movie,
The book Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone differs from the movie Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone in many ways. Most of these differences include characters and scenes. The two ways to discover this Harry Potter adventure are to either read the book or watch the movie. In fact, a person would want to read the book if they wanted the entire perception of the story and all of the information inside; whereas, a person would want to watch the movie if they wanted a rough sketch of the story. The two have dissimilarities but the person choosing to read the book or watch the movie is in charge of what they want to have.
Maria Arellano Period 4 Pride and Prejudice: Differences Between the Movie & the Book When filming a novel, especially one as well-known as Pride and Prejudice, differences can be observed between every adaptation that is made. These differences mainly arise from different opinions concerning the actual conceptual message of the book and therefore lead to rather different intentions of what an adaptation should be about. Hence the fact that no matter which book is turned into a movie, there are going to be different things between the two. Although there were some differences between the novel and the movie, to an extent the movie is still able to depict what Austen wanted her readers to take from the book even though there were some major changes. They say that the “first-impression” you leave on someone, will create a lasting impression, which will lead to the creation of their opinion on you.
There were many similarities and differences between book and the movie. I usually find movie better, but for this I like the book better because it was some events that make much more interesting which was not included in the movie. I didn’t liked watching the movie because we watched after we read a book. Well watching a movie, I knew what is going to happened next which makes it less interesting to watched. I may have choose movie because I can see physically without reading out and imagining.
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).
The theoretical impasse in narrative adaptation studies is represented by an ongoing dominance that is usually referred to as “fidelity discourse”. This is a common way of determining the worth of an adaptation work’s success in terms of its faithfulness or closeness to the ‘original’. To be able to understand an adapted film from a point of view of a piece of art is only possible when we distance ourselves from the literary text. It is difficult to watch a cinematic version on screen of the books we have loved and internalized so intimately and made them an integral part of our imagination. When we read a book, it has the ability to take us into a magic realm, into an atmosphere where all our senses are embraced.
The Big Sleep: Movie vs. Novel Film and literature are two media forms that are so closely related, that we often forget there is a distinction between them. We often just view the movie as an extension of the book because most movies are based on novels or short stories. Because we are accustomed to this sequence of production, first the novel, then the motion picture, we often find ourselves making value judgments about a movie, based upon our feelings on the novel. It is this overlapping of the creative processes that prevents us from seeing movies as distinct and separate art forms from the novels they are based on.
When people think of their dreams being deferred, do you think of a raisin in the sun? A Raisin in the Sun is a movie based off a play written by Lorraine Hansberry. Usually people think of movies as a better option because it is either, better, higher quality, better than the play/book, a preferable way, do not have to read a book, and it is pretty much the same thing. The movie and play have a lot of similarities and differences. 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.
Such a change in the characters was most likely a decision made by Hawks in order to make the novel more believable or exciting to the audience, perhaps assuming the majority of the viewers may not have read the novel. The end of the movie was completely predictable and I think Hawks took the easy way out when making his decision to end with Marlowe and Regan ending up in love. The changes Hawks made in the characters as well as the end are ones that I assume Hawks made on the basis of what he thought would produce the best film. I can respect Hawks' goal, but I think anyone who has read the novel would agree that the novel is the better version between the two. Starting with the character of Marlowe, the differences in his character are major ones.