Most Dangerous Game Movie And Book Comparison

745 Words3 Pages

The movie "The Most Dangerous Game" is very different than the original short story by Richard Connell. When writing, authors can do anything in a story. However, when Hollywood decides to make a story into a film, they do not have such freedom. They are expected to follow the plot of the original story. Movies and short stories greatly differ because of how they are portrayed to the audience. In stories tone has to be displayed in different ways. One of the ways tone is shown is through words. The more descriptive a story is, the more the reader can understand the tone of the story. Diction and the setting of a story both play a major role in the tone. The words an author chooses to use affects the reader’s view of the story. For example, in "The Most Dangerous Game", Connell says, "He was a tall man past middle age, for his hair was a vivid white, but his thick eyebrows and pointed military mustache were as black as the night from which Rainsford had come. His eyes, too, were black and very bright. He had cheekbones, a shortcut nose, a spare, dark face-the face of a man used to giving orders, the …show more content…

In the film, there is a woman, Eve Trowbridge, hiding with Sanger Rainsford in the jungle. The two are both running from General Zaroff so they can live. However, in the original short story, Rainsford is hiding alone. Movies also try to add more action scenes to keep the watcher’s attention. In the story, General Zaroff admits his defeat in his own game and lets Rainsford go free and live, but in the movie rendition of "The Most Dangerous Game", Zaroff thinks he won because he captured Trowbridge and Rainsford fell off a cliff into a waterfall. When the general discovers that Rainsford lived, his first reaction is to fight Rainsford and kill him. This fight could keep the viewer’s attention where sometimes a descriptive story

Open Document