“The Talented Mr. Ripley” by Patricia Highsmith, set in 1950s in a somewhat vibrant, jazz influenced Italy, gives a vivid insight into the mind of a small-time conman turned psychopath. It also provides us with the central concepts of amorality, paranoia and how that survival and greed for money can turn almost ordinary people uncaring and self-indulgent. Highsmith’s use of third person narrative is an effective technique and is used to expand on the thesis of morality in the novel . Tom Ripley, a man in his mid-20’s, claims he is close friends with Richard “Dickie” Greenleaf, when in reality, he doesn’t really know Dickie at all. (3) Approached by the wealthy Herbert Greenleaf, Tom is asked to retrieve his son, Dickie, from Italy. (3) …show more content…
One symbol that I found to be the most important would be the color green. As the reader, you come across many symbols inside the symbol of the color green. Some examples may be the green ring on Dickie’s finger, (37) the bar in the beginning of the novel called “The Green Cage” (3) and Dickie’s last name, Greenleaf. The color green represents the feeling of jealousy or envy. Tom Ripley envies the life that Dickie has and the money that he earns. (37) Tom wanted to be liked by Dickie, as well as his rich friends. (49) The bar called “The Green Cage” represents that Tom is particularly “caged” or for lack of better words, “trapped” with envy and jealousy. The last name, Greenleaf pretty much means “money tree.” Herbert Greenleaf, Dickie’s father, is Tom’s new source of money. (48) Marge, Dickie’s writer friend, gives Dickie a green ring that he swears he will never take off unless he goes swimming. (The Talented Mr. Ripley) Here is another scene where the color green plays a huge part. After Tom kills Dickie, he takes the ring off of Dickie’s finger and puts it on his own. …show more content…
Overall the themes and plots were similar, but there were additional characters and a different ending. There were also small details that were changed, but overall I did not enjoy the movie as much I thought I was going to after reading the book. In the same way that every mystery is exciting until you find the logical explanation, the film is intriguing because you don’t have the luxury of knowing Tom’s background, or why he covets Dickie’s lifestyle. It was because of these changes, even though some were minor that I did not enjoy the movie. I do understand though that in order to appeal to a more broad audience the producers had to add and change details in order for it to be more appealing. The differences did not make the movie unexciting, but the book is definitely better. The book provides a more in-depth profile analysis of the characters involved and especially puts a point on the three leads (Dickie Greenleaf, Marge and Tom
Comparing the book to the movie you can clearly tell what certain things are different. For example, Sydelle Pulaski worked for Mr. Westing in the movie but only talked over the intercom. This not only caused a lot of drama but more depth to the plot. Also, Crow didn’t go to jail but they did talk about most of the consequences of her going to jail. This made a little bit more serious and emotional instead of just letting it go.
I much preferred the movie version to the novel. For me, author William Kennedy’s style of writing is needlessly vague and difficult to follow, yet he did a wonderful job adapting
For instance, in the book Joppy knew Albright; Albright knew Todd Carter; Todd Carter knew Richard McGee as well as Matthew Terrell whereas in the movie every character denied knowing each other except Albright and Joppy. Another noticeable difference is that in the book Frank Green, Daphne’s brother ends up murdered and in the movie he lives and they both end up moving. The third noticeable difference is a character name change from the book to the movie; Matthew Teran in the book is Matthew Terrell in the movie and he ends up being murdered in the book whereas at the end of the movie he’s running for mayor. A fourth noticeable difference is the pier scene. In the book Albright and Easy meet at the Santa Monica pier and in the movie it is the Malibu pier. And the last most noticeable difference between the book and the movie is that Mouse knows Daphne Monet or shall we call her by her real name Ruby Hanks; however, in the movie the audience never finds that out. In the movie the only true thing you get to know about Daphne is that she is both black and white. Therefore, due to the many differences between the book and the movie it is confusing to the audience since it is almost like dealing with two different stories because of the plot inconsistencies.
Despite having many differences the film remains faithful in capturing the novel and putting on film. While one may not get everything from the movie as from the book, the majority of it is there. So for die hard fans of the book there is no need for disappointment. All the main parts of the book are there, the characters, the plot, the setting
The first difference that caught my eye was how there was no cat, in the book there was a cat named, Sammie, and Sammie always got stuck in one of Billy’s traps. But in the movie
The plot and the setting of book and movie are very similar. There was a lot of thins borrowed from the book, but there was a lot changed as well. The movie followed the plot of book very closely and portrayed the setting of the book very well. A lot of the dialogue was borrowed and spoken directly as it was in the book.
The book and movie are completely different. It 's like comparing apples and oranges. (I 'm assuming that you used the newest version with Guy Pierce). The biggest difference is probably the ommision of Haydee and Maximillien and Valentine (three of the main character) and the addition of Jacapo. Jacapo does is in the book, but he is never a large character.
The novel and the movie were both very suspenseful. The main characters are both the same in the book and in the movie but are a little bit different then their counter partners in the novel/movie. In both the movie and
The 3 major differences that were seen are the shattering of the conch, the pilot’s presence, and Ralph’s attitude towards Piggy. Due to these major differences the novel left a greater impact on its readers than the movie on its viewers. Seeing the movie and as well reading the book, personally the book was a better. The book has a very different approach of that showed these 3 major differences to their full extent. Out of the two though, I would choose the book as more pleasant and
The book and the film were both simular, and yet different in many ways. An example would be, in the film, Ponyboy was walking to the drive-in and meeting Cherri and Marcia. Although in the book, Ponyboy began his journey by telling the readers about his experience about being jumped by the Socs and being threatened. The director probably had some options to pick from to leave out from the movie, and the director chosed this to leave out. Leaving out the part where Ponyboy was jumped was an effective move because without the experience Ponyboy was lost and helpless because he did not know what to do when he and Johnny got cornered in the park by Bob and other Socs.
The novel and the movie share many similarities.The book and the novel share the same problems. A example johnny and pony run away since johnny killed bob.In both johnny gets injured badly and dies.
Differences (stick with at least four)- Ponyboy has a good relationship with sodapop and gets along better with darry but still has a very good relationship with his brother. In the beginning of the book, Pony gets jumped by some Socs, but he doesn’t get cut with a knife. In the movie, they cut him. In the movie when ponyboy is talking to cherry he says how the sun on the south side and she says”good how bout the north.” In the book it's written west and east. Also in the movie johnny never got his first beating from the soc in the book he does. In the book it gave more detail and information in the movie it starts like in mid way of the book.
Finally there are lots of differences between the book and the movie. They also show that the movie was a lot weaker then then the book. I can see the movies aren't always better than the books. The books go more into detail than the movie. I enjoined the movie because it is more visual. The book was a little
The book tells the same story as the movie but in a different way it cuts out thing the movies has or the movies adds thing that's not in the book. The book has some not many similar but . I feel the director was unfaithful to the book.The book and movie version of Our America had many differences.
Here are some different things I noticed about the movie and the book. In the book the characters were described in great detail when the main plot was being introduced. S.E Hinton did an amazing job describing the characters so the reader could picture them in their head. The characters have so much