“Tin Star” vs High Noon The movie High Noon is better than the story “Tin Star.” The movie could easily add more drama and action. The story would have drama but you couldn’t really have a lot of action. The movie is similar in how people want Will Kane to quit and run away from Frank Miller, Jack Colby, Ben Miller, and Martin Howe. It’s different with the character names and how Frank Miller comes to the town. Instead of having Will’s wife dead like it was in the book, they had his wife, Amy Kane, alive. The new scenes involved were at the barn, the hotel, the barber shop, and the train station. New people were Helen Ramirez and much more. The way they added new people enhanced the part when the clock struck twelve o’clock, and had a shot
With both the movie and the book there were similarities and differences involving the names of the characters. Justice Wargrave was known as Author Cannon in the movie. Also, Vera Claythorne was Ann Clyde. Another difference is Philip Lombard was Charles Morman in the movie. However, there were some similar names, Mr. Blores’ name continued to stay the same as well as Dr. Armstrong.
While watching the movie, I could see that the main characters in the book, both their names and traits, were the same in both the movie and book. However, aside from that there were many different as...
The film of Brilliant Lies has significant improvements; a scene is added, some are deleted and overall the setting are far more exotic.
Although I will always love the original, the script, the movie was so fun to watch. We got know why lady bracknell is who she is since she apparently was a dancer and got life by having a baby. We found out instead of hugging miss prism got engaged to dr. chasuble which was interesting. Although I want to say what the real change was in the movie compared to the script you got have to watch the movie all the way through. It will be the biggest surprise of your
The movie and the story had some of the same characters but some weren't exactly the same. The movie introduced many different characters and changed some of the others. For example, the movie had the plant lady and had the mentor of Anderton as the founders of Precrime while in the book, Anderton was the only founder of Precrime. Also, Witwer wasn't blond he had black hair and Kapler wasn't named Kapler he was named Crow. In the story they had the red head Fleming who did not exist
First of all in the beginning of the movie it has Maniac Magee at his parent’s funeral and he runs away straight to Two Mills. In the book Maniac is with his relatives and he can’t stand the fighting between his aunt and his uncle so he runs to Two-Mills. I like this part of the book better because I think the situation of why he runs away is more interesting. Another set of plot events in the book that are different are the three plot events that Maniac goes through when he first comes to Two-Mills. In the movie the same three plot events that are at the beginning of the book are distributed all throughout the movie. I like this about the book better because when the movie puts the three plot events in there are terrible
The similarities are quite apparent, the movie plot mainly follows the basic plot that the book took, leaving the viewer’s with a sense of accomplishment, as this is sometimes not achieved in the highest degree. Scout still has a brother, Jem. They both still meet Dill and have a few adventures with him throughout the film. Jem and Scout still have a single father, Atticus, having lost their mother many years ago. Calpunia is still their cook. And the whole story still has an overpowering sense of focusing on two main stories, Boo Radley (Arthur Radley) and Tom Robinson’s trial.
For starters, the ending of the movie was very different from the book. Instead of Vera hanging herself and everyone ends up being dead like in the book, the director of the movie makes a plot twist to make the movie end with two survivors. Philip Lombard and Vera Claythorne are the two survivors who find out who the killer is. They are the only ones alive to escape. Another small change that occured was when some of the victims died for example, Emily Brent. Instead of expecting that everyone dies and there being no resolution, the director decided to make that change so that there could be hope for the
In the movie, they missed things or changed parts, but they also quoted the book quiet a lot and make the story more a like. Most of the most important parts were in the movie. They missed one of the camps that Corrie was sent to and the didn’t show much of the 100th year party of the watch shop besides a picture. I liked the book way more than the movie because the book had more detail and made you understand what that part of WWII was like more than the movie does. In the book Corrie is learning how to have more faith and trust in God more but in the movie, she had a lot of faith the whole time and she didn’t struggle with that as much. I enjoyed reading about that because it made me feel like I’m not the only one that struggles.
In similar ways the setting shaped the main characters into who they are. The character Marlow in Heart of Darkness is similar to Willard in the movie. Marlow tells the story in the Heart of Darkness. He is a sailor trying to find the mysterious Kurtz, and he gradually becomes more and more obsessive of him as the plot progresses. The movie is in more or less the same way. Willard is a soldier on a mission to exterminate Colonel Kurtz. However, as he gradually obtains more and more information on him, his opinions start to change about him. Marlow and Willard are both trying to meet Kurtz in one way or another, and have developed similar personalities. They are both displayed in a positive viewpoint, being the main protagonists of the book and movie, respectively. They also develop similar character qualities: tough, courageous, down to earth, and independent. Their characters are very likeable; as a reader/viewer, most opinions are based off their perspective (point of view). However, despite these similarities, the director chose to change Willard slightly. For example, a movie is much shorter than a book so character development is...
Another similarity in the book and movie is that the characters have to go against their morals in order to decide what to do in certain situations. An example of this in the book is when Skip realises he would have to trespass and steal in order for him to keep himself and his friends alive. Or in...
Stark contrasts exist between the description of the characters and emotional content between the book and the movie. This may be mainly due to the limited length of the movie. In the movie, Rat Kiley who is telling the story seems gentler. In the book they make it seem like everything Rat says is exaggerated, but the movie does not stress that fact. “Among the men in Alpha Company, Rat had a reputation for exaggeration and overstatement, a compulsion to rev up the facts, and for most of us it was normal procedure to discount sixty or seventy percent of anything he had to say” (O’Brien 89). Also, the movie emphasizes the fact that Rat Kiley fell in love with Mary Anne Bell. He himself says he loved her towards the end of the movie. A character that people may tend to have sympathy for is Mark Fossie. In the book, one may not feel for Fossie. The movie shows the character having more feeling especially after he couldn’t find Mary Anne. A third character that is portrayed differently in the movie than in the book is Mary Anne, who is the main female character of the chapter. The movie stressed the fact that Mary Anne wanted to learn more about the Vietnamese way of life. There was a scene in the movie where Mary Anne spent time with the Vietnamese soldiers learning their language and how to cook their food. They also show her going ...
The book, "Being There," is about a man named Chance, who is forced to move out of the house he lived in his whole life and his experience in the outside world. Based on the success of the book, the movie, "Being There," was made. The author of the book, Jerzy Kosinski, also wrote the screenplay for the movie. I think the major difference between the book and the movie is that in the book, we get to read what Chance is feeling and thinking, but in the movie, we only get to see his actions.
Of the many changes made between the book and the movie, most were made to keep the audience interested in the story. Most people who watch TV don’t have a long attention span. Executives at NBC didn’t want to spend millions to produce a movie and then have nobody watch it. The screenwriters had to throw in some clever plot twists to keep people interested. Another reason the movie was different from the book was the material in the book was a little too racy for network TV. Take the ending, for example, nobody wants to see a grown man hang himself. This was a reason the producers had to change some material in the movie.
The movie adaption isn’t very similar to the novel at all. The concept is made out to be another plain doomsday movie, even if it does have some excellent cinematic effects which are accompanied by Will Smith’s terrific acting skills portraying Robert Neville. The movie misses key elements and components of the plot that make up the world and characters that Richard Matheson had in mind when writing the original book. Although the movie is great in the sense of entertainment, nothing is quite like the novel when it comes down to it.