TAKE TWO! CAN YOU REPEAT THE PAST? The two films are very fascinating in comparison, and if anything made me appreciated the other more, both of these movies have major differences to the novel. Upon viewing the 1974 rendition, I can sort of appreciate how Jack Clayton and Francis Ford Coppola were attempting to make the novel “cinematic” in a 1970s kind of way. The film may have actually turned out to be a great if it wasnt for some of these issues that I’ll get to in a touch.
I found I could relate to what the author was saying about being a teenager and many of the studies and information she gives were interesting and I found myself saying oh that’s true, teenagers do, do that. Also the fact that I am comparing fiction to non-fiction was a plus because it would make this project much simpler. I was also surprised to find so many similarities between the movie and book. Some of the things Rosalind Wiseman writes are used word for word in the movie. And the only key difference I could find was that as I mentioned before, the book is non-fiction while the movie is fiction.
The alternate ending to the book was a ‘happily ever after’ approach which did not express how Selena felt as she realised that she was just as bad and just as intolerant as her mother, Roseann. The second reason why the book version of ‘A Patch of Blue’ is better than the film is because it is much more detailed in the way that it’s written which makes reading the book and understanding the text much easier than just seeing a picture on a screen and not knowing everything you want to know about the characters, or the plot. ‘Black, I know because it is all I ever see. I love blue. I like red.
Because of technology being so significant, we tend to use as much of it as possible in movies, or adding as many special effects and unique graphics. For instance, now in theatres, 3-D movies are the new trend, they keep the audience engaged with the movie. As for movies in the mid 1900’s, technology was not so varied, so the movies had no choice but to be basic. Currently, Movies in the 21st century are filled with adult (sexually explicit) content, profanity, and even blood and gore. Alfred Hitchcock’s “The Birds”, portray an unnoticed view of these elements.
Director Gary Sinese was thrilled to read such a book and wanted to make a movie about Of Mice And Men, but Gary Sinese had a different prospective and wanted to create an idea of his own which made viewers had different thought and feelings between the movie and the book. The book and the movie had a lot in common which made both stories similar. For example, one of the biggest similarities from the book to the movie is when Candy’s
It is different because in the movie the glass isn’t shot up on the trucks, but instead they were covered in blood. Also while watching the movie we see that the site of the drug deal was not far into the desert. In the novel it says that Llewyn Moss is somewhere in the middle of nowhere, so you can see that they over exaggerated in the novel a bit. In the novel No Country for Old Men the author did a better job at creating suspense than in the movie. In the novel, suspense is demonstrated a lot more then in the movie because in the movie they don’t spend much time explaining how the characters are feeling at certain points.
The movie wasn’t as dramatic as the book, but I bet it still made an affect on different people. I would recommend this book to anyone because of the great
English 67 Comparison Sample Essay I Give It An “A” Many people argue that the book is always better than the movie. They will tell you that the written page offers something that the cinematic one can't, that a movie always leaves out details that the book contains, and that key elements of the original story are often missing in the film version. And these book lovers are often right. But in the case of Nathaniel Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter and Will Gluck's Easy A (which is loosely based on Hawthorne's novel), the latter speaks to the modern audience in ways the original never saw coming. Yet, they share two very similar heroines, and offer messages about what it's like to be an outcast.
Heckerling’s characters may use the language of the 1990s and have modern-day interests and occupations, but they depict similar traits as Austen’s characters: they display self-interest, vanity and practise deception but also demonstrate personal growth and perceptive honesty. Heckerling does this in a persuasive and engaging manner in order to target a larger audience. Heckerling conveys a similar message by utilizing and exploiting the technique of film. It is true as Jocelyn Harris writes, “In an age when the visual is said to have superceded the verbal, the movie Clueless provides extraordinary pleasures to people who still read books.” It takes Austen several chapters to introduce her characters – Heckerling is able to do it in seconds through facial expressions, tone of voice, style of dress, gestures, body language and the frame of shot. Thus, Heckerling caters for a wider and more literate audience.
Kevin Flores 10-27-14 Gatsby Argumentative Essay: Both the 1974 version and the 2013 version of The Great Gatsby are terrific movies but the 1974 version best reflected the novel The Great Gatsby written by F. Scott Fitzgerald. Those who feel that the 1974 version is more faithful to the novel argue that the plot was the same unlike the 2013 version. Supporters of the 2013 version argue that the Gatsby parties were more extravagant in the 2013 version. This is important because the themes of the novel can be lost if the movies are changed too much. One example that supports the 1974 version was the party scene.