регистрация / вход

Lord Of The FliesBook V Movie Essay

Lord Of The Flies-Book V Movie Essay, Research Paper Following the norm is just too hard. Movies do not allow audiences to create their own imaginary island with their own group of boys. In the novel Lord of the Flies, there are many things that lead to the obvious time developing characters, mentally stimulating and systematic dialogue that allow the reader to interpret the book to their liking.

Lord Of The Flies-Book V Movie Essay, Research Paper

Following the norm is just too hard. Movies do not allow audiences to create their own imaginary island with their own group of boys. In the novel Lord of the Flies, there are many things that lead to the obvious time developing characters, mentally stimulating and systematic dialogue that allow the reader to interpret the book to their liking. This puts Lord of the Flies book superior to its 1990 motion picture.

Noticing that a movie is subject to a very small bracket of time, it unfortunately has to leave out a lot of things portrayed in the twelve chapter book. Because of short attention spans, people get distraught and uncomfortable when a movie drags on. With a book mind you, a person can pause or put down the story and pick it back up at their own leisure. Time is critical when editing a movie, one must very keen to allowing eye candy to continuously flow from the screen. The book allows your always active imagination to create a imaginary scenario centered from you own likes and dislikes. Characters development in books is crucial to the visualization or interpretation of the reader. In a movie situation, the audience is forced to see it from a uncomprehensible state of another person s perspective or interpretation. Ralph for instance could have been a selfish, whining baby to one person, and a sensible leader to another. In movies Ralph is forced to be a character interpreted by one person s active imagination. Hence not everyone relates, and the movie is only good to those who think the same narrow minded way.

Hats off for the person who could develop a mentally stimulating movie which could feed the active imagination better than a wide open book. For a movie to be good it has to be visually stimulating. Most people like the fact that a two hour movie will allow the director to do the thinking for them to keep their attention on the eye candy . Say a movie followed the book exactly, word for word. Interpreted by the director. No one would sit though it firstly, secondly people don t want a movie to be difficult to understand, if its easy to understand then you have the attention of most people. With the mentally stimulating pictures in your mind as you read the book, you allow your own pictures to intrigue you. We all imagine or dream what we like. I m sure if we could think things and they appear to us, we would all think of stuff that definitely betters us. This is the way one thinks when they read the book. Its their thoughts that are in control. So the lasting impression of a mentally stimulating book is more sufficient in the satisfaction of the story than that of which a two hour movie could ever leave. This point has proven the largest difference between virtually all books into movies.

Step by step a movie controls what you see and what you don t see, allowing you to follow a routine of events and forces you to notice things you may have missed in a book. For instance in the book Lord of the Flies you may have missed that Piggy was fat for instance. In a movie it is clearly shown. So a book always allows you to flip back and forth like a bible so you can greater your appreciation for the story. It leaves you wanting too read it again to catch things you missed. An author has a simpler task because imagination is always the best way to see things. Systematic dialogue and visual effects only allow the audience of a movie to be more intrigued of the event instead of the feeling the reader gets when he has more of an in depth thought into a particular character for instance. Like when Simon was with the Lord of the Flies and the beastie and the feelings and thoughts you were involved in. The movie s dialogue doesn t allow for audio thoughts. Hence the compassion I felt for Simon was not near the same I felt for him in the movie. In fact I didn t understand the point. This is a good indication that imagination is far better that of the systematic dialogue of the movie, making a significant difference between the book and the movie.

Because a lot of books are made into movies we have been accustom to seeing or visualizing the intricate story of an author though another persons eyes and imagination. This makes it difficult sometimes to critique a book verses the movie. Especially because most people don t even bother reading the book anymore; since the movie is coming out anyway. So the developing of characters, mentally stimulation of a book and the systematic dialogue of a movie has lead me to believe that with a book, you will far more appreciate the story than from another s interpretation for a movie. Let your imagination ride and enjoy your own movie , turn the page and keep reading.

ОТКРЫТЬ САМ ДОКУМЕНТ В НОВОМ ОКНЕ

ДОБАВИТЬ КОММЕНТАРИЙ  [можно без регистрации]

Ваше имя:

Комментарий