The Crucible Movie Vs Book

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

The Crucible is an award winning 1953 playwright that was composed by American author, Arthur Miller. The play takes place in the time of the 1600’s Salem Witch Trials and tells a story of 17 year old Abigail Williams who has an affair with well entrusted family man, John Proctor. When Williams is caught in what seems to be a conjuring of spirits in the forest one morning, she faces accusations of witchcraft which would result in a hefty charge if pleaded guilty; death. Understanding the price for such a crime, Williams comes up with a lie to cover up her tracks. The playwright has had many runs in the production industry and even appeared on movie screens in the late of 1996. However, when looking at the movie and the play there are many differences that can be seen when looking at the two side by side. While the movie and the play do indeed have some similarities, they also have some differences that are very much apparent in terms of how the characters are portrayed and the scenes that had been cut out as well as the script having some altercations when transforming this playwright into a major motion picture. When zooming out and discovering the differences between the two it is obvious to see that the playwright is and always will be the better of the duo.

In The Crucible and The Scarlet Letter, they are both known to be a part of the Puritan religion. The puritans are known to be very strict. Often people are put to cruel punishments for mistakes or sins they had committed. The actions they take to “punish” a person are extreme. The Puritans act and seem so committed to their religion. The people seem “Holy” but you never really know what happens behind closed doors. The Puritan religion is so strict is causes members to become corrupt.

One way the book is different is the way Dave Isay play a major part in the kids live in the movie so you see the impact he has on them and the up and down with the documentary Ghetto Life 101. You don’t see that with the book because you only get Dave Isay point of view on the five pages unlike the movie where he in their live constantly. Also the part where Lloyd the part when Lloyd got beat up when his father cheated in a game of pool. That

The book and movie The Crucible show many differences as well as many similarities. The main setting and theme in the book stays the same throughout the film, but there are some drastic changes that impact the story . Some characters act the same like Reverend Parris who is just as greedy as in the book as in the movie. Another similarity is when Mary Warren tries to convince the court that Abigail was lying, by pretending to see a yellow bird. A difference between the book and the movie was in act II when elizabeth and john were eating dinner, Elizabeth forgets the cider and has to be reminded to pour it, John asks Elizabeth if she is troubled.

The film version of "the crucibles" shows that Thomas Putnam wanting George to die in order to take Georges' land, whereas the drama didn’t mention George as a character. The similarity from both the movie and drama is when Abigail went to the woods and drunk the blood to get rid of Elizabeth. These two scenes highlights Miller's cause which is jealousy can make you selfish.

Whenever a book comes out, people will read the novel or the short story. If the story gains enough popularity, the book may become adapted to a film; however, one cannot expect what he or she saw in the book to correlate with the movie. Salvation, the book, and movie differ from each other and these differences serve more importance than the similarities do. More happens in the film than the book.

There are lots of things that are the same and a lot of things that are different that make the book and the movie different and the same.

In The Crucible by Arthur Miller, Miller was able to bring the story to life from a play to film. In the play he was not able to use numerous locations, but in the film he was able to change the locations. Since Miller is able to change and add locations in the film the story was told in a more effective way.

Some of the similarities are Meg defeating “IT” with love. In both the book and the movie, when Meg has to face off with “IT” to save Charles Wallace she

It was fairly difficult to find any differences. The plot of the book and movie is very similar. The family goes to the hotel, the hotel is cursed, jack tries to kill his family. The setting is he same exact hotel in the same place. Most movies change the age of the character to make the movie more interesting.

Rachel and Tom’s relationship is bad overall but in the movie, I saw Rachel’s pain so much clearer.             It was easy to empathize with Rachel’s character throughout the movie. Megan’s character was harder to relate to for me personally. In the book, I felt like I could understand how she was so broken from her past.

And in the novel, it feels like you are in their lives because it gives you a lot of information and when you're watching the film you feel the same way like it sucks you right in. Also in the film it comes to life you can see the love between just as if I was reading the book. Some differences are in the novel they give a lot more details about some scenes and in the film they took out a lot and made the scenes shorter. Also, the book was very long and the film was a bit shorter. These are a few similarities and differences between the film and

The example of the major dissimilarity is the characters. In the novel, “A guy name Maestro Mantoli known as Enrico Mantoli, was murdered in the middle of a highway,” (pg. 9). He is a composer that came to the town of Wells to perform. Though in the movie the victim's name is Philip Colbert who is a wealthy industrialist man that constructs a factory in the town of Sparta, and his body was found in an alley. Additionally, in the film some characters were taken out, such as, Duena, Erik Kauffman, and Ms. Endicott, also some characters like Charlie, Shagbag, Mrs. Colbert, and Henry were added in, that wasn’t from the book.

“It is rare for people to be asked the question which puts them squarely in front of themselves” (qtd, in Bigsby xxi). Arthur Miller used his work The Crucible to pose an unwritten question, placing people at the time “squarely in front of themselves,” by comparing the Communist terrors in the 1950s to the Salem Witch Trials in 1692-93. In order to accomplish this hefty task, Miller had to portray each of his characters not only with historical accuracy, but also in a way in which the readers could understand and believe them. There is an ongoing debate over whether the written version of The Crucible or the 1996 film version of The Crucible did a better job accurately and believably portraying the characters. Specific characters such as Abigail Williams are better portrayed in the written version. The written version also more accurately and believably portrays the characters as a whole. Some may argue that the film version has a better portrayal of the characters because of its immaculate job characterizing Reverend Parris. Arthur Miller’s original written version of The Crucible did a superior job portraying the characters as understandable to the readers, especially in the case of historical accuracy, than the 1996 film version did because it provides a more historically accurate portrayal of Abigail Williams, provides key background information for the most important characters, and provides more information and description for the characters as a whole, yet the film