Crucible Compare and Contrast Movie vs Play

594 Words3 Pages
There are many differences between the way the play The Crucible was written, and the way it was presented in the film adaptation. Scenes towards the end are deleted as well as scene settings are changed, and characters are altered in the movie. Some scenes are only mentioned rather than shown. In the movie as we see everything unfold it becomes easier to understand, more so than the play. As the play was made into a movie it had to evolve. Characters and their antics are what make a movie fun and interesting. A significant change is in the character portrayal. In the play, Parris seemed to be overly egocentric and self-conscious. He is still thus in the movie, but is more whiny, and annoyingly so. Putnam, also, seems to have a personality change. In the play, his personality is not so domineering as in the movie, where he is bordering on psychotic. His role seems to be made larger and more significant in the movie, which presumably accounts for the change in character representation. Throughout reading Arthur Miller's play and watching the movie I have come to understand why we separate church and state. Judge Danforth is almost completely different in the movie than in the play. Danforth's character in the play is almost smart about the way he does things and his general body language. Case in point in the play for the most part Danforth rules the court as a dictator, who firmly believes that Abigail and her posse are incapable of wrongdoing and in this light he represents a strong man with his own ideals. In the movies portrayal of Danforth he is a blindly ignorant self righteous judge that values his reputation above human life. For example in the movie whenever Abigail wails about being attacked by a yellow bird, Danforth is flabbergasted then begins shouting at Mary with a crazed edge to his tone and posture almost like he gets off
Open Document