Yes, the basics of the plot are similar, but in the movie, there are changed details, mainly like missing scenes in the movie that the book originally had, or simplified events. In the movie, there was an additional girl character that was not in the book. The house Moon eventually came to at the end of the story was supposed to be a brick house. Some of the things the characters in the movie said were a bit different from what was said in the book. Things like that.
There are many simularities and differences in the book and movie " The
Leah Wilson Rawls is an American published author of the 1961 book “Where The Red Fern Grows”. About ten years later, Wilson Rawls made the book into a movie. The movie was considerably different, however, I prefer the book more than the movie because of the character, plot and setting differences. I think that there are some significant character differences between the book Where The Red Fern Grows to the movie version. Some characters from the book don’t even exist in the movie, such as Billy’s one sister.
Books and movies have been around for many years and lately movie directors have been making more and more movies based off of books. Most people do not know that around 50% of movies are based off of books. Although, it really depends on what people mean when a movie is “based” off a book. Some directors say a movie is based off a book, but has a different plot and seems totally different. So, in order to keep true to the book, directors keep the plot relatively the same, but there are a few times they decide to change the message entirely by changing just a few key events.
The book and the movie has the same setting, main characters and motif. Arguably, the greatest differences were in the events or plot. In the novel, there was a scene where Mr. Halloway shot and killed the Dust Witch with his smile. Also, Mr. Halloway broke all the mirrors in the Mirror Maze with his laughter, instead of punching the glass in the movie.
Although there are many differences between the two, there are also many similarities. Like how in both the movie and the novel she outsmarts the
There are many differences made in the movie and the book to simplify the plot to save time. Majority of the simplifications being made do not affect the story, but have a different way of portraying each chapter. The movie and the book portray the messages in different ways with the same meaning. What happened in the beginning of the movie was that Huck was getting into a fight with a kid and he soon discovered Pap’s footprint, while in the beginning of the book Huck being civilized by Widow Douglas.
As for example when Sofia Harpo's wife is sent to prison for knocking out the mayor, in the book it is said to have happened the night she comes home with her new man. But in the movie Sofia lives with her family for a couple of weeks in town. Although it doesn’t drastically change the movie itself, but it changes other parts in the movie to where one can notice the out of placement given. Something else that is highly out of place is how in the book the reader is able to learn about Netties life as she writes to Celie, but in the movie we as reader never learn about Netties adult life until Celie finds her letters with Shug. Then later on Nettie comes home with her new family to reunite with Celie after thirty
The book made it fell that it has more action. The movie was just straightforward by how Ender and his crew just when and killed them with no action. So the book was better then the movie in so many ways. The film and book have the same plots and themes.
Another difference is that in the movie they go into town, but in the book it 's never mentioned. Something else that was different was that in the book the mood was happy most of the time, while in the movie the mood was sad. A difference between the book and the movie is that in the book momma was going to burn Byron, but in the movie she does not burn him. A big difference is that in the
The adaption of the 1967 film “The Taming of the Shrew.” by Franco Zeffirelli, was a good adaption to the original play “The Taming of the Shrew.” by William Shakespeare, because the dialogue, and the scenes are followed well. Although going from a book to a film, you will always have some differences. In this case the alterations between the film, and the original play were minuscule. When you are reading a book, and then watching a movie, you can sometimes find yourself confused as to what is going on.
“Where the Red Fern grows,” is a book and a movie. The movie and the book has the same scenes but the movie is missing some details. The book has more narration than the movie. The book in my opinion feels like I am there. It draws me in more than the movie does.
In my opinion there are a lot of comparisons between the film and the book, but there are also differences between them too, but also they have impacted the audience in both the film and the
So a lot of small details from the book have to be cut. Also the movie has to rearrange the events in the book in a way that it is interesting for the spectator to watch. Sometimes books jump in time and use different literary methods that have to be changed when adapted to movies because they can slow or interrupt the rhythm of the movie.
Have you ever watched a movie based on a book that told the exact same story? To me, for some reason, books always seem to be the better one out of the two. I feel that in novels, the author develops the story with as many details as possible, while in movies that aspect doesn’t appear in the same way. There aren’t as many details in films since it has to last for a certain amount of time, but books can last for as many pages as the author would like them to. When I read, the fascinating novel “Beowulf,” I really enjoyed how the author made me use my imagination to create a picture of the world that the characters were living in.
