Oskar Werner is wonderful in the lead. But Truffaut made the mistake of putting Julie Christie in two roles in the same film, which was very confusing, and he eliminated some of the other characters: Clarisse McClellan and Faber the Philosopher and the Mechanical Hound. I mean, you can’t do without those!” Other than the characters in the story, including the score and alternate ending of the film, the movie was superlative. The characters in the story have precise roles and by leaving them out/altering them from the movie hinders the characterization and the originality of Bradbury’s novel. The major alterations in Truffaut’s film deals with the characters and their significance to the novel and movie.
Towards the battle one last time, Beowulf who is being old and tired fights a dragon that has been frightening all his people. This battle ultimately kills him but he manages to kill the dragon too. The double death is for protection of his people. By putting the welfare of his people before his own and displaying super-human physical strength and courage, Beowulf shows the characteristics of heroism. In addition, he understands that fate ultimately decide the outcome of his battles as showing no fear and preparing for any possible outcome.
Grendel takes everything the Dragon had to say to heart, after being granted stone skin Grendel goes on slaying men and that started the twelve year war with Horthgar’s Danes. The shaper is a storyteller in Horthgar’s court. He provides the Danes with stories of heroic acts, love, and grace. He also downplays the savage past of Grendel. Even though all of the shapers songs are fake, it provides the Danes with something to hope for and strive for.
The movie focuses more on McMurphy as a christ symbol or hero instead. Another aspect the movie loses is Chief's “foggy” hallucinations. The combine is completely lost and nurse ratched’s seemed less evil in the movie as she did from the book. I wish that these scenes were incorporated but with the change of character point of view I can see why it would be hard to conquer such effect. Both the book and movie got to this point by Formans decision to change perspective from Chief to McMurphy.
A Replublic Empire would have meant trying to override the emporer, which in Roman times would never happen. Some medieval weapons included in the movie did not exist. These were the maces and cross-bows used during the battle scenes. The gladiatorial program was also inaccurately portrayed. The normal program included beast-hunts in the morning, execution of criminals over lunch, gladiator in the afternoon.
The two want to say they did such horrible things because of a movie they had seen, Natural Born Killers. Of course it would be easier to blame the movie for their actions instead of facing the consequences for what they have done. Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc is a fallacy in which two events occurred in a succession, and the former event is believed to have caused the later event to happen. Such as the rooster crows before sunrise, therefore the crowing of the rooster caused the sun to rise. “Ben and Sarah had no history of violence.
None of these things save the authentic costumes come to my mind when I think of the movie Goodfellas. I personally would not deem it to be an epic movie at all, because although it contains blood and violence and a masterpiece in its own right it doesn’t fit in among the other great epics, for example I can’t even begin to compare this movie with greats such as Gladiator and Braveheart. These brilliant films are full of action and magnificently produced unlike Goodfellas which isn’t one of the most exciting movies despite the casual F bomb dropped every second word. The subjects of epics usually have something to do with royalty, great military leaders or famous people from various periods in history, which is not the case in Goodfellas. Although the whole film revolves around Henry (in reality Scorsese) and his life story, he isn’t a prominent figure in history or even a hero in the story.
I believe king did not mention this to state he is against Disney movies, I think it was just to defend his idea that most horror themes and Disney movies are alike in many ways. I say most because he also does state that children need not to be watching the Texas Chain Saw Massacre because children still do not differentiate reality with fiction. Upon understanding this point in his text, I could then clearly identify that is exactly why children are the perfect audience. They cannot effectively differentiate fantasy and reality. Adults will get scared temporarily, but then will get over that feeling.
Reminding that Ahmed wasn’t trained to be a warrior but fits the ideal warrior best. In Beowulf, originally an oral story transferred to a epic, he demonstrates the character of the Anglos hero throughout. One of the similar pieces between Beowulf and The 13th Warrior are the location of the first battle. Both groups in each epic are fighting an evil woman underground. Buliwyf, a character and leader in 13th Warrior, fights off the tribe mother and kills her even though he is poisoned and dying.
Fifty years ahead and now King Beowulf faced a task of killing a dragon. He would “[fight] with fate against him” (724) seeing as his “the ancient blade broke” (727) while striking the dragon’s side. The beloved king would eventually die with “None of his comrades\Came to help him” (745-746) and his “Followers… ran for their lives…” (745-748). King Arthur’s story is also an epic poem which speaks about an honorable leader who will do anything to defend his people. Arthur went off to battle, with his comrades at his side the whole time and is able to defeat his foe, but doing so left him fatally injured, until he is eventually killed.