Lord Of The Flies: Movie Analysis

1839 Words8 Pages
Many movies that we see in the movie theaters now are an adaptation of books from the past. We have many famous examples such as Spiderman comic to Spiderman Homecoming and Doom the video game was made into a Movie starring Dwayne Johnson. Linda Hutcheon defines adaptation in “Beginning to Theorize Adaptation” as " repetition, but repetition without replication" (7). What Hutcheon is stating is that all adaptation might be copied, but it will not be the same as the original. Many adaptations can exist from comic to movie, book to movie or game to movie, but not all adaptations are successful, since most of what is done in a book or game can require a huge budget to bring to reality. Hutcheon breaks down three different modes to telling an adaptation.…show more content…
In a book, the authors can about anywhere in the world or any type of conflict because there’s no location budget, you don’t have to pay actors and there are no video editing charges. So, in the adaptation of Lord of the Flies the director had to make changes to the movie, so it was acceptable to have kid actors play the roles of the children on the island. One of the changes made by the director Harry Hook was changing the beginning of the movie. In the beginning of the novel, we find Ralph naked on the beach enjoying the sun and swimming in the ocean. As Piggy finds him he does the same, but he tells Ralph he can't swim. As a director you have to modify this to be a more accepting to viewers, so in the movie they just exclude that part of them swimming in the ocean. As they walk through the beach, they find the conch half buried in the sand, which they use to find the rest of the group. Taking the scene out didn’t affect the movie, since it felt more of an extra in the book, which had no effect with the plot or the escalating conflict between Ralph and Jack. The second example of adaptation of the book to film is Wilson being tortured and tied in the film. In the movie he was just thrown on the ground and whipped by everyone. By having the torture scene in the movie, he could have lost his whole audience by being too graphic, instead he decides to make his…show more content…
The Lord of the Flies keeps the important things the same. To start they are stuck on a deserted island in both movie and novel. Which is important because many of the events that happen to the kids could not be replicated anywhere else. They need the jungle to be able recreate the scene which they burn part of the jungle down to kill Ralph. Another important part that could not be changed was Ralph being elected the leader of the group. That was the beginning of Jack's and Ralph's rivalry, which leads to all the problems and death of characters through the story. The one thing that cannot be changed are the protagonist and antagonist of the story. In both movie and book the fire is not maintained, so a possible rescue is missed, which leads to Ralph and Jack clashing about whose fault it was. This moment is the iconic moment because it’s where both characters become complete enemies. Although changes were made to some scenes, metaphors were used to the replace the idea, for example in the previous paragraphed I spoke about the torture scene. Many people could agree that whipping someone is a form of torture but it’s not to the degree that descriptive in the book. So you understand the point that they wanted to make its just in a different way. Even though similarities and differences can make a successful adaptation, another factor that
Open Document