The central idea of this movie is the lessons learned by two geniuses. Through William’s help Jamal is able to discover the amazing writing talent he has, and through Jamal’s help William is able to discover the world that he only saw through his window for the past forty years. This move was able to bring this idea across clearly through its amazing characters. The characters of Jamal and William worked well together, and the metamorphosis that underwent both of them was clear. Jamal’s writing became amazingly good and William was able to see himself as an actual person rather then just an author.
Emmanuel Minto December 11, 2012 Mrs. Seltzer Language Arts-104 Compare and Contrast Essay The Outsiders book by S.E Hinton were eventually made into a movie. They were so much alike because they both were very good from the start. Some things that happened in the book, although they didn’t happen in the movie. You could really tell in both the book and movie the friendship and love with some people. If you watched the movie and read the book you might think the same thing, you might not, but here are the reasons that I think the book is better even if the movie wasn’t that bad either.
Hamlet Movie Comparison From the two versions of Hamlet that we watched, Mel Gibson/Glenn Close and Kenneth Branagh; despite the fact they have the same plot but there are few differences between the both versions. Hamlet acting is really different in both versions of the movie. In Kenneth Branagh version we see the movie is done with strong emotions but Hamlet overacts in most of the scenes. We also see that Hamlet is not a calm thinker by watching how Hamlet amplifies his manners throughout the movie. In Mel Gibson’s version of Hamlet, Hamlet’s acting is outstanding because while watching the play we can see the effort and talent Gibson has put in the movie.
I think he did this because, he wanted to get bigger roles in movies and not get small roles that know one noticed him. I think James Stewart became the most famous when he did movies with Alfred Hitchcock. I think his two best movies were Vertigo and Rear Window. I think he was a perfect fit for these two movies because, he just seemed like that type of guy in real life. He continued making films into the late 60’s until his hearing problems got to
Each serves its purpose well; the steel frame buildings just do so with more flair. I like to think that only a good movie would still be watched after fifty-three years. But, everything good about the book is missing or distorted (plot, characters, details). The plot is too convoluted to make a movie. But the movie of The Big Sleep is still a success and, well, a good movie, just because they changed the plot and the characters.
The film was so successful because of the fantasy storytelling, musical catchiness and the abnormality of the characters the made the film stand out for the rest and becoming very unique. The film also featured what may be the most elaborate use of character make-ups and special effects in a film up to that time. The Wizard of Oz in 1939 is everybody's cherished favorite, greatest fantasy film musical from MGM during its prime years. The film was first re-released in 1949, and then in 1955, They also broadcast the film for many seasons, regularly on network TV as a prime time event; its first two showings were on CBS on November 3, 1956 and in December, 1959 (AMC). The film soon became a classic institution with annual showings for Thanksgiving, Christmas, and Easter time, in some years, and was sort a rite of
Similar results were found at the Moviefone webpage where Casablanca was named “The Greatest Love Story on the Big Screen” by its users. These two measures clearly indicate that viewers love Casablanca, but what about the critics? The Rotten Tomatoes webpage compiles results of reviews by syndicated critics and their review found 53 out of 54 or 98% of the syndicated critics gave favorable reviews to Casablanca. Clearly Casablanca has fulfilled the requirements of popular acclaim. But what specifically do the critics like about Casablanca that has resulted in its popular appeal?
Then, along came "The Wizard of Oz." Needless to say, audiences were not only stirred by the terrific story, but they were also dazzled by the film's special effects. The special effects are glorious in that old Hollywood way, in which you don't even have to look closely to see where the set ends and the backdrop begins. Almost all films were still being made in black and white, so the switch from black and white to color would have had a special significance in 1939 when the movie was made. "The Wizard of Oz" was a major achievement when you consider that it was filmed nearly three-quarters of a century ago.
I’ve heard people refer to “The Notebook” as cheesy, as a ‘chick flick’ (a label very few of my colleagues can stand because of its negative connotation), as predictable and sappy. So “The Notebook” doesn’t exactly take a brain surgeon to guess how the story is going to play out. And it does unapologetically play on your emotions, practically begging you to squeeze out a few tears. But here’s why I enjoyed “The Notebook”: it’s a movie you can relax and let flow over you. It’s also one of the few films out there that tells a complete story.
While Skyfall isn’t based directly on one of Fleming’s novels, Broccoli, director Sam Mendes and the rest of the cast all agree the books have attitude, and the key to a great Bond is staying faithful to that tone. Bringing back Daniel Craig as your 007 makes the job a little easier. The cast kept mum while speaking to press in Istanbul, but details of the film’s larger arc echo the “back to Fleming” mantra. “It’s going back to the grassroots of MI6,” (Naomie) Harris suggested. “What actually happens is MI6 becomes