Both the novel and movie were exceptional. However, a movie can never fully express the book, as it cannot show every single detail outlined by the novel. The movie did a great job at portraying the culture and people of Afghanistan, making the movie seem very vivid. However, the movie left out a bunch of details since the novel is long, and it do not have enough time to show them all. Sometimes this is also a good choice because some details are not that important, so they can be left out with no impact on the movie.
For example, Franco Zefferelli produced his film in 1968, and Baz Luhrmann produced his in 1997. Both films provided very different perspectives on Shakespeare's text because of the eras they were set in. The symbolism and imagery in both films were very different because of this factor. Zefferelli’s film remains faithful to Shakespeare’s original play, whereas Luhrmann made a more modern version of it. Zefferelli didn’t change the play much; it was aimed at people who wanted a film that was basically the same as the play, but with better scenery and cuts.
In my own view, I agree with Stevens that watching TV does not make you any smarter. Stevens advocates that shows such as ER and 24 are only,”good at teaching you to think…about future episodes...” In Stevens view, watching all those hit dramas, 24 and ER will not increase your IQ anymore than the person who does not watch TV. I understand the logic behind Johnson’s claim that shows with more complex story lines and loads of multi-threading can have a higher cognitive value when compared to the less complex and intense shows. However I am not convinced that watching these shows, is actually more beneficial then reading a novel, playing a round of
Analyzing the Prologue of Romeo and Juliet 1996 The 1996 version of Romeo and Juliet, directed by Baz Luhrmann gives a different perspective of Shakespeare’s famous play. Luhrmann has adapted this play into a modern action through the use of different modernizing and cinematic techniques. Both the writing and the film begin with the prologue, which sets the scene. Unlike in play writings, prologues are rarely narrated in films. Thus, the 1996 version of Romeo and Juliet presents the prologue as a television report.
“Joe Gould’s Secret” is a nonfiction story written by Joseph Mitchell, and a movie based on this book is also called “Joe Gould’s Secret” directed by Stanley Tucci. In today’s times a lot of movies are based on a written literature. Many students watch the movie instead of reading the book maybe because it’s more enjoyable but for some they take it as an easy way out. It’s obvious that it’s easier to watch the movie then reading the book but the movie lacks the details that are present in the book. I think if a director of a movie is basing a movie on the book they should add a lot of the little details that lead up to the climax of the story that were present in the book.
Both films provide very different perspectives on Shakespeare's text because of the different eras in which they were set. The symbolism and imagery in both films are very different because of this factor. Franco Zeffirelli’s version of Romeo and Juliet takes a traditional and more suitable approach for the script, being set in the Elizabethan period as this was the period that the suits the script best. The acting in this movie is very theatrical and is being acted as if it was a theatre performance, just not on stage. It is set in Verona, Italy, which is where the play was based in the script.
Some people are employed, as “critics” of movies however that does not mean that what they say about a particular film is fact, it is merely their own opinion. Opinions that critique films and animations can come across as fact when trends appear in the critiques. This can also be backed up with the critics supporting evidence however in the end it is still an individual’s opinion and not 100% fact. Stating this I have created the graph based on these opinions but have done so using the majority vote from critics and people to base my trends off. This means that my findings are still not fact but are closely aligned to the majority rule, which is often perceived as fact.
(This is only a selection - you will notice many more changes from the text you have studied.) Back to top It may be all right to mention these things so long as you show you know that they are the director's ideas, and not Shakespeare's. But avoid such errors as writing that Juliet shoots herself at the end of the play! And don't call the play a “film” or a “book”. Finally, do not copy long passages from the text of the play.
Moises Soto Paper #3 English 2150H Otello and Othello – Equally Dramatic In our lives there is a common belief that a movie based off of a book has no comparison to the book itself. Some people will even conclude that the movie ruined the book. This is because when reading a book, our minds creates images of what we are reading; we go on an adventure in our minds via the words that we are reading. Everyone is different and so the images produced from what we read is different than the images produced in the minds of others. A movie has the images set and we cannot control it.
It offers customers “more for less”. But even though they were remarkable and they have a good strategy, they make a big mistake in 2011. First we’re going to discuss the marketing strategy of Netflix and why it was and can be an example of a good marketing strategy. But after presenting the good part of Netflix strategy we’re going to present the mistakes Netflix make. Netflix marketing strategy consists in there “more for less motto [sic]”; they offer their customer more options of movies for less money.