The Maltese Falcon: Book Vs. Movie Essay

When discussing American culture, the influence and interplay of film cannot be understated. We are a nation consumed with the media. Today, the movie business is one of the highest grossing businesses there is. We hold movie stars up as though they are super human. We closely watch their style, their dating lives, their party habits, and even their favorite restaurants, among many other things. We rely on movies to lift us up, teach us about other cultures and time periods, and even to teach us about our own culture. Often, movies reflect the time period they are filmed in and directly reflect the social tensions of that time and the film noir genre is no different. One of the most famous film noir movies out there, The Maltese Falcon,

When we saw the movie and the book and saw the movie, there were a couple of thing that they did not mention or did in the movie. In the movie they cut out some thing from the book. They did not really put everything they said in the book into the movie. They also did not really get some people personal feature. Here are something that were different from the movie, than what it said from the book.

The Outsiders is a book that has been read by many people. Most of the people have enjoyed the book, but not the movie or vise versa. The Outsiders was very good and had a great story behind it. The reasons why the book is better than the movie are the book gives more detail, people can let their imagination go wild, and the movie leaves out key elements that the book has.

There are many differences between the book; To Kill a Mockingbird and the movie. Some differences are easy to spot and some aren’t. Many things that are in the book aren’t in the movie. Many of these things you don’t need, but are crucial to the plot of the book. Movies and books have differences and similarities, but many things in books MUST be included in the movie.

Samuel Spade of The Maltese Falcon novel by Dashiell Hammett is quite different from Samuel Spade of “The Maltese Falcon” motion picture. The book was written a good decade before that version of the movie was produced and in a much more casual time period. The novel focuses on making Sam out to be a more complex character than the movie does. He is not just “the good guy” as he is portrayed more so in the movie. The time period may have had a lot to do with the differences between the 1941 movie and the book, published in 1929. The first thing to consider is that the late 1920’s were a much more relaxed, party era, while the early 1940’s were an era of strict decorum. While

"It's a sin to kill a mockingbird," explains Atticus Finch to his children (To Kill Dir. Robert Mulligan). Neither the novel nor film version of To Kill A Mockingbird is better than one another, just different. "It's no secret that adapting a novel to film can be a perilous affair. A movie, even when it's good, doesn't often convey the feeling of the book it's based on. But in this case screenwriter Horton Foote treated the Harper Lee novel - about a Depression-era Alabama lawyer and his two children - with love and respect, and the director successfully evoked the

The actor choices from the film compare to what the book envisioned, but also contrast. The character of Daisy is not similar in the film to what the book

The​ ​PBS​ ​article​ ​on​ ​film​ ​adaptation​ ​discusses​ ​the​ ​challenges​ ​of​ ​adapting​ ​a​ ​novel​ ​into​ ​film​ ​and​ ​the​ ​changes

Neither the novel nor film version of To Kill A Mockingbird is superior to the other, just different. In the book you delve more into the separate characters while in the film you see the relationships in action. The book gives you a broader view of everything, but at the same time the movie points out everything that seems important. Lastly, the novel shows Scout as a girl caught in the middle, when the movie seems to paint Scout as a girl without a inkling of what is going on.

Multitudes of well known films are derived from novels; however, despite the majority of the accurate depictions, these adaptations contain several varying scenes as compared to the book. For example, John Steinbeck's novella Of Mice and Men and the 1992 movie version share similar elements, yet the movie strays from the original source material. While the portrayal of the characters are accurate, certain important segments are added or deleted. Therefore, despite the correspondence of the 1992 Of Mice and Men movie to the novella, they’re not exact representations of one another. While movie adaptations often have inaccurate portrayals of the novel’s characters, the Of Mice and Men movie is one of the exceptions.

Gone with the Wind is one of my favorite love stories of all time. Margaret Mitchell wrote the beautiful story in 1928 and first published in 1936. The book is one of the best-selling novels to this date. Shortly after the book was published, it sold over one million copies within six months, as well as being awarded the Pulitzer Prize. The book immediately caught the eye of a young producer named David O. Selznick who immediately purchased the film rights for $50,000. The movie was just as big of a hit as the novel. Gone with the Wind won ten Academy Awards out of thirteen nominations. By today’s box office records, after adjusting for inflation, Gone with the Wind is still the most successful film in box office history. (IMdB) This

THE GODFATHER, made in 1974, details the Corleone crime family in Manhattan during the mid 1930s. The Don, Vito Corleone, played by Marlon Brando, leads his organization against a relentless narcotics push by a rival family, the Sollozzos. Vito Caleone does not want anything to do with drugs because he believes they will be the downfall of the Mafia. The story, covering a ten year time period, offers a rich tapestry of Mafia life from the inside, drawing the audience into witnessing the transfer of power within a close-knit family

I think that this book will be about a struggle, because the characters on the front of the book are looking like they are in an internal struggle. I movie also tells me what the book will be about, but I do think that some parts will be different than the movie. The movie is hard to follow, but I think that the book will be easy to follow- because it seems to have a lot of detail and time put into it. I think that the book will be about the same things as the movie; a pair of teenagers fall in love, but one of them is in a cursed family and they can not be together. I think that book will talk more in depth about the struggles that Lena (the cursed girl) has with her mother, because the movie didn’t go into it as deeply.

Although viewers have their prejudices on film adaptations, they normally attack the structure of the story, exclaiming that film did not stay faithful to the original story; only when a role is poorly cast do the scrutinizing viewers point out the acting. In some cases, however, the actor’s performance is so precise that it, in itself, carries the

It is common in today's media-driven society to reach into the past for inspiration and ideas. A trend has developed where original works are transformed into other mediums. For example: books are turned into movies and/or plays, movies are turned into weekly sitcoms, and cartoons will spawn empires (Disney). These things happen so often that an audience rarely stops to question the level of authenticity that remains after these conversions. Perhaps it is only when a project is not well received that people begin to think of the difficulties involved with changing a work's genre. Using Gulliver's Travels as an example, discrepancies and additions in the movie can be