These two books have a few differences between them because if there wasn’t, there would not be much excitement or surprises in the stories. The Red Badge of Courage and the Soldiers Heart are very similar but still contrasting details throughout the story. These books are so similar that there wouldn’t be a surprise if it was copied from each other. These two books needed some alterations to form a good story line to make it interesting and worthwhile to read. These two books similarities and differences still make it extremely great books to recite and to comprehend the hardships of the bloody
Film and written literature have often gone hand in hand. Written literature has often served as an inspiration for film. Directors often make movie adaptations of books and people who have read the book will often criticize the movie for lacking important detail covered in the book. Film, depending on many factors can often be better than the book, or at least do it justice. Since the conception of film many have argued that written literature will be obsolete.
It keeps the watcher outside the world which helps us learn the life lessons instead of empathizing with the characters in which was present in Macbeth. The reader could feel the guilt and anger that was going through Macbeth’s head as well as in Lady Macbeth’s. Both the play and the movie might have great similarities, but each has its own unique way to deliver the message to the reader/viewer. The philosophy in Throne of blood takes us well over Shakespeare, but they both serve the purpose of the story perfectly. Both Macbeth and Throne of Blood are unique in their own way, whether it’s the way the characters react, or to the themes.
Considering that the story is indeed different from the movie studies show that movies often portray more details than written versions of literature. For instance, adding different characters and changing their names gives readers and viewers different insights of them in movies that in the stories. In fact, the editing of the locations and characters in the story played
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. In watching the film “ The Taming of the Shrew.” I did not find myself getting lost very often.
No one in our modern society speaks the way they did in Elizabethan times, so modern audiences watching play productions of Shakespeare’s work will most likely not comprehend or enjoy the actual play because the language acts as a barrier. But the many aspects of film can help break down that barrier. With the help of cinematography and special effects, directors like Baz Luhrmann can provide modern audiences with an easy and in-depth understanding of the play that they may not have cared about learning in high school. Additionally, appropriations can help introduce modern audiences to Shakespeare’s original plays. Some audiences may enjoy movies like Warm Bodies and feel inclined to read Romeo and Juliet after.
Do not start at the wrong foot by assigning actors who do not suit the characters’ attributes described in the book versions. The characters’ attributes include physical features, traits, and habits. Actors need to be able to portray how the characters are pictured in the books. A good example of characters portrayal is Stephen Hawking by Eddie Redmayne in the movie The Theory of Everything. Redmayne plays the character of Stephen Hawking very well.
What is the difference between the film and the novel Divergent? Most of the noticeable differences are the setting, characters, and sequence of events. Other differences include characters descriptions, their internal conflicts and how they interact with other characters. When you go to a movie that was based on a novel, you could notice the differences and similarities between them. In the movie some of the parts from the book were cut out because of timing or the director realized that some scenes would be too disturbing for their targeted viewers.
The changes from the book and the movie make a difference in your interpretation of the novel overall. It kind of makes you wonder what the book would 've been like if these changes had been opposite and the Hester in the movie was actually the Hester in the book and they just reversed roles. Throughout the novel and the book both versions change drastically and alter your perception of how she would act if it was real
If one has read ‘Macbeth’ a number of times, it is clear to recognise that there are large parts of the speeches and soliloquies that have been left out. However, Shakespeare’s story does not lose out as a result of the cutting down within this film adaptation. According to Kurzel in an interview with Film 4, the director stated that he did not want the soliloquies to lead the film (YouTube, 2015). I found that the way the soliloquies were presented in the film, as though the characters were in conversation with a figment of their imagination, to be a clever and inventive way to adapt a traditional screen version of Shakespeare’s work. It aids in the translation of their growing insanity and reclusiveness, but also in understanding post traumatic stress disorder that both Kurzel and Fassbender have claimed their adapted Macbeth to have (Film 4, YouTube, 2015).