What are your thoughts about how the book and the movie compare? What differences did you notice between the two? How true to the book was the movie? Did the actors portray the characters the way you imagined them when you read the book? If Steinbeck had been able to see the movie, do you think he would have approved? Explain. Which is better - the book or the movie? Why?
#1 - Your response should be no less than two paragraphs and posted by 10 PM, Thursday, Oct. 31st. All responses will be published by noon on Friday.
#2 - Select one of your classmate's post and write a 3-5 sentence response to his/her viewpoints regarding the book vs. movie. This response should be posted by 8 AM on Monday.
The book and the movie are obviously very similar. However as usual the book is always better, In this case it is as well. The main difference between the two is that book uses a whole lot more detail. Also a few scenes in the movie are differnt such as the ending. The ending in the book ended with George going into town to get a drink. That did not happen the movie.
ReplyDeleteYes I feel like the actors were as I imagined in the book. They attitudes were very alike and believable. If Steinback were to watch the movie I think he would approve. If I had to choose between the book and the movie I'd pick the book due to their being more detail. However I didn't like the story because sad stories are awful.
The book and movie both are a really good. They are very similar. Really the only differences in the two is the ending in my opinion. The movie was very true to the book besides the ending. The difference was that they both didn't have hats that George had Lennie take off in book. The other that I really noticed is that Curley and the guys did not go see when George killed Lennie. Also I did not understand while Lennie and George were walking with each other at the end.
ReplyDeleteThe actors weren't bad at all. Some of them seemed right but I viewed Lennie to be a lot bigger. Another actor I figured would be skinnier and maybe younger was Carlson. Also I thought Slim would of been more handsome and younger looking. I think Steinbeck would approve pf the movie because it is really good and similar. I think the book was better because it was really descriptive and made you want to read more but also movies are easier to understand and you do not have to have imagine everything so over all they are pretty equal.
I liked the movie better just because I don't like reading. There wasn't really any major differences just minor. Like at the end of the book, it said the other people trying to find Lennie all came after the gun shot. Then afterwards they went I get a drink. That was the only major difference I could find.
ReplyDeleteThe book was every true to the movie. The actors all seemed the way I pictured them. I think Steinbeck would have approved because it all led up to its expectation. Everyone played the part like in the book. I like the movie better just because it was a movie. I don't like reading but it was one of the better ones I have read. He book goes into so much detail which makes it interesting.
I thought the movie was pretty similar to the book. However, there were several scenes in the book that the movie left out. One of them being was after George shot Lennie they never said how George explained to the guys what happened. I felt like the book made Lennie seem way bigger and taller than he was in the movie. Also the book used more detail with characters and their personalities that the movie left out.
ReplyDeleteI do not think that Steinbeck would approve of the movie. I think he would say it didn't go into enough detail. I think Steinbeck would've wanted the end of the story added to the movie. I feel like if you don't make it as close to the story as possible it's almost like a different story. I enjoyed the book much more than the movie. I thought the book was a lot more discriptive.
I have to agree with u. The movie did leave out a lot of scenes that the book said. I still think steinbeck would approve of the movie though. In my option the book is better.
DeleteI think that the book was a little bit better than the movie because it gave a lot more detail than the movie. But of course it's hard to make a movie exactly like the book. Although I enjoyed both, the book would be my choice for the better of the two. A few differences I noticed was in the dialog. The movie added a few lines that were not in the book and also the movie took out a few lines. But for the most part the movie stayed completely true to the book.
ReplyDeleteI think the actors did a good job of portraying the characters, especially with Candy and with George and Lennie. In my mind I pictured Lennie as bigger than he was in the movie but the actor who played Lennie did a good job.
I think Steinbeck would approve of the movie because the movie displayed the book fairly well.
I think the movie and the book compared really well. They were pretty much the exact same. the only thing i really noticed that was different was the ending. In the book it said that George killed lennie when he heard all the men riding up. In the movie george just shot him but the men never came riding up.
ReplyDeleteI think the actors in the movie did a really good job portraying the characters in the book. The only one that i thought would be different was Lennie. In the book they said he was some huge strong man so I expected him to be a lot bigger than he was in the movie. Other than that the actors done awesome. Curly was cocky and arrogant just like in the book and his wife liked causing problems just like in the book
I agree with you about it being similar. I think it was just like the book. It helped me understand the book a lot better. I didn't expect Lennie to be as big as he was. George was a lot smaller then I thought he was going to be.
Deletei think that movie was pretty in line with the book. the movie had the main parts even if it wasnt how it was in the book. there were a few scenes that were different. one that i notice in particular would proabably be where Lennie and George were putting bundles of barley?? in the back of a truck then curleys wife comes by them and talks about why curleys hand is busted but never finished it. then that conversation got finished by if i remember the bunk room with again only them three. how that whole scene happened in the movie is not how the book potrayed it. in the book lennie and candy were in the stable bucks room and curleys wife came in and then the converstation of curleys hand started there and ended there.i thought the characters didnt really have the image i thought. i thought curley would be big but i thought he'd be bigger and taller than what the movie showed him to be. i also thought curleys wife would have more appeared to be sluttier compared to what the movie had her to be. i thought curley would have been short and fat and have red hair. i thought that the stable buck would be reallly skinny and pretty rough looking. if steinbeck was alive and saw the movie i think he wouldve been pleased with it. the movie had the same affect. it got the same message along throughout. i personally like the book better, one if few books i actually like. i think its because books let you basically changed the way you want the characters to look like and how the scences are. i think that it makes it more enjoyable. a movie basically tells you straight out and doesnt give you the option of how a character looks and a scene looks.
ReplyDelete If Steinbeck was still around to see the movie, he would approve it, because the movie does portray the naturalistic point of view in which he wrote the novel. He would also approve of the movie because I tells some but not all of the scenes are exactly the same, or even in the movie; and the ending is not the same as the book. The book is a lot better, because it tells you exactly what is going on in every situation, while in the movie, it isn't as easy to tell what the characters meant or fealt through their body language. I thought it was pretty good that's all.
I agree with you there where alot different secens that didn't happen the way the book did. But like you said all in all the movie followed the book pretty well. The few secens that where different where a little confusing but you can kinda fill in and still understand it though.
DeleteThe book and the movie are quite similar and extremely sad. I cried and it was beautiful. There aren't very many movies or books that I cry for. There have only been about two or three. Some people would say I have no heart but I have the biggest heart of all. I love anyone and everyone no matter what they look like. That's how Lennie is if you're nice to him he'll be nice to you. He is such a sweet kid. Now in the book I thought Curleys wife was gonna be a rich stuck up blonde that just flirted and showed off her body, but in the movie they portray her as a good girl gone bad just because she's stuck in the house with no one to talk to or nothing to do. It's not her fault she just wanted to talk to someone about her feelings!
ReplyDeleteIn the book I thought George was gunna be almost as tall as Lennie but he wasn't. Now Candy I thought he was going to have long white hair and be very wise. His dog, I thought was gonna be black and white and matted worse than he was. I thought Carlson was going to be skinny not as big as he was in the movie but he was played very well. Slim was exactly how I thought he was going to be except I thought he was going to have more to say at the end of the movie like he did in the book. Lennie wasn't what i thought he was going to be. In the book i thought he was going to have blonde hair and a full head of hair. I thought he was going to be way taller and skinny but strong. So i thought he was going to have big muscles but be very skinny in the gut.
This book actually was better than the movie and if Steinbeck saw the movie i bet he wouldn’t have liked it that much because he probably would have portrayed the characters to be really different as I did but besides those things the movie was pretty true to the book. I loved it alot actually except for those minor things. I wished that Lennie didn’t have to die. It wasn’t his fault but killing someone is way different even though he wasn’t all there to understand that. In my belief the book was way better than the movie because it gave you that fine detail you can’t see in the movie. I think they should remake the movie with characters that actually give you that detail. Other than that the actor that played Lennie was my favorite because he got all the stuttering down and it was good but again not quite as good as the book, but it was still good.
The book and movie had a lot of details that was close to the same. I picture George being a guy that talks more to out smart other characters. Lennie was close to how I picture him in the book, maybe a little more muscle tone. It weird to say but in my option I felt the book had more detail than the movie. You understood more how the characters felt and the tension in the settingThe book and movie had a lot of details that was close to the same. I picture George being a guy that talks more to out smart other characters. Lennie was close to how I picture him in the book, maybe a little more muscle tone. It weird to say but in my option I felt the book had more detail than the movie. You understood more how the characters felt and the tension in the setting. Such as when Candy dog got shot and all the characters sat around uncomfortable. In the book you picture a more tension than is showed in the movie.
ReplyDeleteMy vote would be that the book is better with all the details. Steinbeck would be happy with the movie cause how close the movie is to the book. Being the author of a book with so many topic that could teach people how to live their lives. I think he might disagree with some parts of the movie that doesn't show those topics. I say the movie and book were good overall and both are equally good with details, feelings, and life lessons for the reader.
Our opinions of the book seemed very similar. We both were picturing Lennie and some of the other characters being a little different. The book did seem to give the more detail of it but I did like the scenes to play them in action. I agree with you in the Candy scene it showed the men being uneasy but it was better described in the book and you could feel and imaging the tension in the air. I also agree Steinbeck may disagree in parts of the movie although overall I think he would be pleased with the movie.
DeleteI thought that the book and movie was very similar. The big scenes in the book was just as i pictured in the movie. The movie was true to the book. I didn't picture the characters to look the way that they look. I think that Steinbeck would of approved the movie because it was pretty much just like the book. I like the movie better, it helped me picture what was going on better.
ReplyDeleteThe book and the movie were pretty close together. They both were the same story (duh) and the characters looked as I thought they would. In the book the scenes took longer and seemed to have more of an old timey feel some scenes from parts with lennie were a little more bland and I thought that he would be more dramatic. In the movie there were some parts missing like when Lennie was talking to the rabbit and his Aunt Clara. He did not in the movie and when George shot him it was like it happened a whole lot sooner.
ReplyDeleteIf Steinbach saw the movie he would probably be amazed, I mean it was a color movie. he didn’t see that kind of stuff, but in all reality he would probably want to make the book longer and make the movie a two or three part thing because of how he wrote it, as a play; and it would be a long play, but movies would make it shorter. I think the book was better because the book always is. I always prefer read the book because it is way better to understand points.
I think that movie was pretty in line with the book. In the book lennie and candy were in the stable bucks room and curleys wife came in and then the converstation of curleys hand started there and ended there. I thought the characters didnt really have the image. i thought curley would be big but i thought he'd be bigger and taller than what the movie showed him to be. i also thought curleys wife would have more appeared to be sluttier compared to what the movie had her to be. i thought curley would have been short and fat and have red hair. i thought that the stable buck would be reallly skinny and pretty rough looking. I think that the book was much more descriptive.
ReplyDeleteIn the end where George was going to kill Lennie. In the book it seemed to me that it took him a lot longer to get himself to shoot him. In the book his hand was shaking and he put the gun down before he shot him like he wasn’t sure about it. The way that he shot Lennie in the movie was that he just all of a suddenly shot him. He didn’t even through the gun after he did it like he did in the movie. The movie did do a very good job to keeping with the book. There were only few senesce cut out or added in. Lennie was the only actor that I was surprised on. While reading the book I thought that he was bigger yet and smarter. In the movie he wasn’t able to talk normal at all. In the book I just thought that he couldn’t remember anything. If the author was still alive I think he would have approved of it because the movie didn’t take anything big away from it. If the movie ended in a happy way then the movie would have been ruined but it ended similar to the book. The movie still gets the point across. I enjoyed both the movie and the book.
Tanner Dollens
ReplyDeleteI think the movie and the book compared exactly like each other. I didn't realize the time of the book was back in the day until i watch the movie. I got a lot better understanding of the characters in the story after watching it. I actually comprehended what each character did. The movie was great on explaining the details like Stienbeck did. The characters in the story acted if Stienbeck made the movie himself.
I think that if Stienbeck saw the movie he would be very pleased. It matches up almost perfect. There were just a few things that were barely different. I thought he made the movie at first it was so close to the book. If i were Stienbeck i couldnt be anymore please. It was a great book and movie and i was really satisfied.
I agree that the movie was very similar to the book. Also the movie took out a few scenes that were in the book and the movie had sences that were added. For example in the end where George was going to kill Lennie, in the book it seemed to me that it took him a lot longer to get himself to shoot him. In the book his hand was shaking and he put the gun down before he shot him like he wasn’t sure about it. The way that he shot Lennie in the movie was that he just all of a suddenly shot him. He didn’t even through the gun after he did it like he did in the movie. I liked the movie because im not much of a reader but the books always give more detail and movie gives you better understanding. Its great book i enjoyed both the movie and the book.
DeleteCouldn't of said it better than myself. I agree with you, movies help you understand things better and comprehend what the author is saying. I also agree that Steinbeck would be pleased with this movie. I think the only reason I liked the book better was because it always kept me on my toes waiting to know what happens next.
DeleteI like the movie better. That way I can actually see what the people are like and also how they speak and see what the ranch is like that they worked on. Yes he would have approved of the movie it shows what his hometown was like.
ReplyDeleteThe movie because you can actually see I'd the book was anything like the movie at all and if it's not then what are the difference. Why they are that way. Also how the much different you have between the two and why. The characters were a little different than what i thought they would be.
This doesn't make any sense to me. You want to see the movie to see how the how the people were like? I think it was easier to see the characters in the book than the movie because Steinbeck was able to create a more in depth view by the way they spoke. On the topic of Movie vs. Book I think that the book can say tat the movie was wrong but not vice versa, so in tat regard I say nay to what you said,
DeleteI agree with Lucas. Yes the movie was very good, but the book to me was exceedingly better than the movie. I agree that Steinbeck was able to create a much more in depth visual aspect of how the characters were, and their dialogue. In terms of the movie, they did do a good job recreating what Steinbeck wrote, but i still think the book was much better.
DeleteI disagree. I liked the book better. The book went more in depth describing the characters and their thoughts. Also there was some differences in the movie in that the conversation took place in different places than in the book.
DeleteThe book and the movie were both very similar. The characters and their personalities in the book matched with that of the movie. There were a couple scenes in the book that were not included in the movie however. Honestly, as usual, I enjoyed the book much better than the movie. I was able to visualize what was going on, and i enjoy doing that over having it shown to me. The movie was really good too.
ReplyDeleteThe book and movie were very similar to each other in text and characters. The movie shared the same dialect and language used in the book. While watching the movie I thought some of the characters would be a little different especially lennie expecting him to be a lot bigger. The one part I felt the movie gave a better understanding was when they had to run away and hide in the irrigation ditch all day because it was easier to see the intense feeling. I think Steinbeck would be very happy it was made in to a movie and reflected back to the book as well as it was.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed the book more because it seemed to go in better details of the characters. The book was easier to follow and had more emotion than I felt was reflected in the movie. Also, the book showed more emotion and held suspense throughout to make you predict what would happen. Overall, it was a very good story. I would definitely recommend reading the book first to better understand the characters and feelings and then the movie to answer any questions or just to enjoy.
The book and movie are very similar. I do like the book better though. The book goes more in depth of the character's thoughts. The movie does a okay job in trying to make the thoughts clear, but it can't compare to the book.
ReplyDeleteIf Steinbeck could watch the movie I think he would like the way it turned out. It connected to the book very well. It portrayed the characters very thoroughly as well. The only thing is that it was harder to make the hard characters thoughts known.