The incredible journey that changed their point of view. The Incredible Journey and the movie Homeward bound: The Incredible Journey were very inspirational. The Book was the tail of two dogs and a cat travel across Canada to try and find Luaths master and go home. In the movie they were on a journey but the events are a little different. They are very similar, but they differ in characters, setting, and adventures. And that is a little about the book and movie.
The characters are very different by the personalities, names, and actual being. Tao he becomes Sassy who is pampered, as her names says very sassy and her gender which influences her personality. Bodger he becomes Chance, his personality becomes wild, free, and energetic; he changes by becoming a young dog who just goes with Luath and Tao and is not the leader. Luath becomes Shadow, he is the old dog who is more calm, energetic and is a lot stronger and wiser. These are some character changes that influenced the story.
…show more content…
Well for starters in the book they were in Canada but the movie takes place in San Francisco which changes their journey, difficulties, and their mood. The weather affected them by making it hotter or colder so the journey, the weather would make the journey longer, and since Canada is cooler then it would have taken longer for the journey. The last on is where Longridge lives in the book he lives in a remote area in Canada, in the movie Frank lives on a farm that is remote, and this makes their Journey easier and harder. And these are some things that the set had effect on the
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
The short story “Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been” and the movie Smooth Talk both portray a rebellious teenager who was approached by an unknown guy that tries to get her to go with him. Even though, the short story and the movie are not exactly alike, both are similar by having the same personality for Arnold and Connie. However, there are differences like Connie and her mother’s relationship and how the movie continued even after Connie got into Arnold Friend’s car. First, the short story “Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been” is placed during the 1960s in drive-in restaurants, shopping malls, and homes out in the country.
First, Lennie is very different, in the movie he is a average sized guy but in the book he is described much bigger, he is described “a huge man, shapeless of face, with large, pale eyes” (Steinbeck 2). In the book Slim is described with long, black hair, but in the movie he has very short black hair. Finally there is Candy’s dog. Now this dog is not a big character but there are still differences. This dog in the book is portrayed so old he is skin and bones grey hair type dog but in the movie he looks like he is five years old, he is not that much different than a regular dog.
Though there were many differences in the book compared to the movie there were still many thing that were the same for it still had the same plot the same murder and the same intentions of the murderer to kill everybody on the island. Some more things alike between the book and the movie was that the story followed the nursery rhyme "Ten Little Indians" and there were the china figures of the ten little Indians. A big thing that is simular is that they both take place on Indian Island in a large mansion bought by a "Mr. Owen". Like the book the Mr. and Mrs. Rogers are already on the island, when the other guests arrive. The murderer goes by a different name in the movie opposed to the book they are both the same character.
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 movie and the book “Everything, Everything” are very different when comparing the author and directed decisions. The author included Madeline architecture teacher by having him being the only visitor besides her nurse to grade her projects. In the book Carla states, “MR.WATERMAN’S ON his way up” (page 57) Carla let Madeline know when he was on his way up to check out her architecture project. The director chose that not to happen, the teacher is mention once in the beginning and that's it. When Madeline does her projects in both the movie and the book she includes an astronaut in every project she does.
It is crazy to think how pop culture can point to the things it works so hard to reject, but in the case of Divergent by Veronica Roth, parallels between it and the gospel abound. Divergent is set in a dystopian Chicago in which the citizens are divided into 5 factions; the brave, the selfless, the intelligent, the honest and the kind. The story follows Tris Prior, a sixteen year old girl who realizes her Divergence, or possession of characteristics of more than one faction. The novel and film adaption of Divergent include many similarities to the gospel, notably the emphasis on a choice of commitment, the concept that we need more than one characteristic to grow, that salvation is brought about through sacrifice, and that humankind is at its heart, evil.
The first difference that I have immediately noticed is that the story starts out in the middle at Frank’s funeral, but the movie starts out in a field. Another difference in the movie is the absence of Frank's sister, Cathleen and older brother, Steve who we read about in the story. " Next day Steve drove with his wife back to Baltimore where he managed the branch office of a bank, and Cathleen, the middle child, drove with her husband back to Syracuse." (p. 80) Moreover, in both versions the characters have different jobs, for example Matt owns a store in the story.
The rest of the actors remained as their role in the story throughout the film plainly they stayed the same. Nevertheless, the story was alright, making you climb a hill of delight then drop you off a cliff from its sudden sad moments. The whole film was actuallyGiosué’s (Joshua’s) narration of his father’s doings.
The Book I would like to become is Gone With The Wind by: Margaret Mitchell. I would like to become this book because it 's so complicated that you can’t really follow along to until the end of it. A little background information is: Scarlett O 'Hara is a beautiful, spoiled, stubborn, rich, young woman who is used to getting her way by any means. She can deal with anything that is thrown her way. For instance: The Civil War, Carpetbaggers, and the loss of loved ones.
In the book, the story takes place in what could be near present day. However, in the movie the community is extremely sophisticated with their technology, that it makes the novel seem like it's taking place in a completely different century. To get the purpose of the book across, the filmmakers didn’t have to advance the community, therefore I believe the book has a superior setting. One similarity is, the book and movie had a similar interpretation for elsewhere. Each of the descriptions is bare wilderness, without civilization for miles.
In the end I found the film to be easier to understand vs the book as it was an easier and more straight forward plot line whereas in the book it seemed to jump around leading to constant flipping between stories and pages to get a better
Into the Wild is a personal tale of Chris McCandless’ journey as he runs away from home to try and live in the Alaskan wilderness. The book follows the story through the eyes of the author as he investigates the mysteriousness of Chris’ life through the eyes of those he came in contact with and the journals left behind. However like every book adapted into movie there are slight differences and characterizations throughout the story that aren’t expressed deeply enough or seen in a different light. Into the Wild is no different.
No matter how hard directors and screenwriters try, it is impossible for any movie to be a perfect reflection of the detailed plot and intricate characters presented in a novel. I had watched the film adaption of Richard Matheson’s I Am Legend prior to reading the book, I was very aware of major differences from the get go. The to main categories that I could see differences being placed in were emotion and action. Many aspects of the book were changed to emphasize both either emotion or action for the film. Considering pieces of literature cannot be easily transferred to the screen, few of these changes were very necessary.
Matt Brickner Beat Class 9/27/16 On the Road After reading Jack Kerouac’s novel, hearing that there was actually a movie adaptation immediately struck me because I was trying to think about how a director would go about turning Kerouac’s writing style into a film with an apparent plot. The reason I thought this was because On the Road is written in a way that I don’t think I can draw an accurate comparison in other literature I have read. The book is written in a very “stream of thought” sort of style, in that Kerouac, made it seem like everything he was describing, which at some points was everything around him, was just popping into his head and then going straight onto paper, such as descriptions of paper mache mountains and the like.