The Tempest Movie Vs Play

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

The second difference between the play and movie “The Tempest” is the time that it’s written and the time shown in the movie. The play takes place during Shakespeare’s time, the early 1600s. When Shakespeare was writing “The Tempest”, “people still believed that the sun went round the earth.” (Shakespeare 115-121) England was a Christian country and was educated by the Church’s education and, grammar schools taught Latin. The setting of “The

There are so many differences and similarities in the book and in the movie. There are also advantages and disadvantages in the movie and book.

When comparing the book and the movie, the differences greatly outweigh the main plot points of the original story. This is understandable, seeing as movies and books have vastly different criteria to conform to. Some of these differences were of no consequence and had no bearing to the main story, and some actually improved upon the original plot line.

The movie and novel were both really good, but they just had some differences. For example, the format was different because when your reading a novel you have to make your own visual picture on what is happening and make up what you think the characters are like. While watching a movie the creators

There are also some differences, and some similarities between the play and the movie with some of the events. One similarity is when Gata-Man/Caliban tries to get an indulgence out of Miranda when she is young. There are many dissimilarities between the play and the movie, many of these are caused by the absence of many characters. Even the absence of the malignant characters Stephano and Trinculo are missing, removing the scene of Stephano finding Caliban and Trinculo, and multiple other scenes.

There are so many changes between the book and the movie. The book was a lot better than the movie I think. When a producer makes a movie out of a book, they take the most interesting things from the book and just erase the rest of it. Us book lovers absolutely hate when they go to watch a movie based off a book they love and they leave out the most important details.

My second reason why i think the movie is better than the book is because you could see what they are going through and see how they are feeling. In the book it doesnt say or show how they feel or what they are experiencing and in the movie it shows what they have to go though and what they are feeling and it's not the same as the book. This shows that the movie has more emotions and feeling than the book does and it shows more detail than the

Therefore the movie and play has similarities and differences. Despite the play i loved how they put the movie together was amazing it all made sense and i thought that it was going to be very boring but i just loved that movie and the life that anne frank had lived in that attic.this is why i think the movie is better than the

Overall, the movie paralleled the book and one enhanced the other, there was never a dull moment in either one which kept you hanging

I like the movie better, solely because it was able to present the information stated in the book quickly, and it had a some very good actors portraying the main characters. First, the movie is better than the book because of the entire section about Bill James. Bill James was a guy who figured out that there was more important stats to look at when

As far as I am concerned, I appreciate those moving stories in the book version. As William Shakespeare said: there are a thousand Hamlets in a thousand people’s eyes. The author thinks highly of this film version, but many watchers cannot bear the film at all. No matter other people hate that you like the film, we cannot copy the emotion, which you get from the film to others. The world is so big and the emotion is so complex, feel free for what you are feeling about one film or something

In the movie you were able to give an image a lot of stuff that you could not imagine by just reading the book. But the book had some good points too. I think movies are better because the imagery is in front of your eyes not in your head and it does not take as long to watch a movie as read a book.

I believe that the movie was much better than the book for manifold reasons. Starting off, it was much more clear. While the book might have been more informational it is not very clear, and I was stuck re-analyzing various paragraphs many times. Subsequent to the previous reason, the movie also had more of an influential impact on the watcher’s sentiments. This made people not only like the movie additionally but also made them feel more attached to it in terms of how much satisfaction they get when watching the movie. Last of all the film is more memorable than the book. With the book, I’ve already disremembered most of the details. But on the other hand, I recollect every single aspect of the film. This is because the movie concentrates

One main reason the book was better is because in the story, the narrator was a character. That means you get to know what's always going on in his head. For example, in the movie there's a scene where the narrator gets injured and