Following the norm is just too hard. Movies do not allow audiences to create their own imaginary island with their own group of boys. In the novel Lord of the Flies, there are many things that lead to the obvious time developing characters, mentally stimulating and systematic dialogue that allow the reader to interpret the book to their liking. This puts Lord of the Flies book superior to its 1990 motion picture.
Noticing that a movie is subject to a very small bracket of time, it unfortunately has to leave out a lot of things portrayed in the twelve chapter book. Because of short attention spans, people get distraught and uncomfortable when a movie drags on. With a book mind you, a person can “pause” or put down the story and pick it back up at their own leisure. Time is critical when editing a movie, one must very keen to allowing “eye candy” to continuously flow from the screen. The book allows your always active imagination to create a imaginary scenario centered from you own likes and dislikes. Characters development in books is crucial to the visualization or interpretation of the reader. In a movie situation, the audience is forced to see it from a incomprehensible state of another person’s perspective or interpretation. Ralph for instance could have been a selfish, whining baby to one person, and a sensible leader to another. In movies “Ralph” is forced to be a character interpreted by one person’s active imagination. Hence not everyone relates, and the movie is only good to those who think the same narrow minded way.
The Essay on Rings Two Towers Movie Book Story
Lord of the Rings Two Towers A fun way to spend three hours of your day Lord of the Rings Two Towers is a movie based on a novel written by JRR Tolkien. The story is a fantasy battle between good and evil set within a land called middle earth. Nine companions embark on a journey to destroy the ring of Sauron. The quest to destroy the ring, will decide the fate of middle earth. The book presents a ...
Hats off for the person who could develop a mentally stimulating movie which could feed the active imagination better than a wide open book. For a movie to be good it has to be visually stimulating. Most people like the fact that a two hour movie will allow the director to do the thinking for them to keep their attention on the “eye candy”. Say a movie followed the book exactly, word for word. Interpreted by the director. No one would sit though it firstly, secondly people don’t want a movie to be difficult to understand, if its easy to understand then you have the attention of most people. With the mentally stimulating pictures in your mind as you read the book, you allow your own “pictures” to intrigue you. We all imagine or dream what we like. I’m sure if we could think things and they appear to us, we would all think of stuff that definitely betters us. This is the way one thinks when they read the book. Its their thoughts that are in control. So the lasting impression of a mentally stimulating book is more sufficient in the satisfaction of the story than that of which a two hour movie could ever leave. This point has proven the largest difference between virtually all books into movies.
Step by step a movie controls what you see and what you don’t see, allowing you to follow a routine of events and forces you to notice things you may have missed in a book. For instance in the book Lord of the Flies you may have missed that Piggy was fat for instance. In a movie it is clearly shown. So a book always allows you to flip back and forth like a bible so you can greater your appreciation for the story. It leaves you wanting too read it again to catch things you missed. An author has a simpler task because imagination is always the best way to see things. Systematic dialogue and visual effects only allow the audience of a movie to be more intrigued of the event instead of the feeling the reader gets when he has more of an in depth thought into a particular character for instance. Like when Simon was with the “Lord of the Flies” and the “beastie” and the feelings and thoughts you were involved in. The movie’s dialogue doesn’t allow for audio thoughts. Hence the compassion I felt for Simon was not near the same I felt for him in the movie. In fact I didn’t understand the point. This is a good indication that imagination is far better that of the systematic dialogue of the movie, making a significant difference between the book and the movie.
The Essay on Never Cry Wolf Movie Book Wolves
In this essay I will cover main differences between the book and the movie giving my opinion of why these changes were necessary in the making of this film. I will discuss the purpose of Mowat writing this book and explain how the movie gets the point across. Mowat feelings and my own on the movie verses the book will be shared at the end of the document. In the beginning of the movie we dont know ...
Because a lot of books are made into movies we have been accustom to seeing or visualizing the intricate story of an author though another persons eyes and imagination. This makes it difficult sometimes to critique a book verses the movie. Especially because most people don’t even bother reading the book anymore; since the movie is coming out anyway. So the developing of characters, mentally stimulation of a book and the systematic dialogue of a movie has lead me to believe that with a book, you will far more appreciate the story than from another’s interpretation for a movie. Let your imagination ride and enjoy your own “movie”, turn the page and keep reading.
