Thunder And The Jungle Comparison

I thought that the movie “A Christmas Carol” was better than the book. Movies provide better action and visual pictures. When watching a DVD you can actually see what is happening in the story and plot. When you read a book you have to use your imagination and visualize what's happening in your head. Although some movies can change the plot and sequencing of the original book, it is still fun to watch the movie and see how different or similar they are.

Many people may agree that the movie was better, but personally, i think the book was better. The book let your imagination go wild, but the movie just held your imagination back by showing you the scene on a screen. Unlike the movie, the book gave a more vivid description of “The Tell Tale Heart” by telling you every single detail. That is why I think the book was more enjoyable to read instead, of watching the movie.

The perception that the novel is usually better than the movie version in this case is true; I preferred reading the novel over watching the movie. The novel

“We’re here to give you the severest thrill a real hunter ever asked for. Travelling you back sixty million years to bag the biggest game in all of Time”(Bradbury 224). The thought of travelling back in time just to shoot a prehistoric beast of the Past is just that; a thought. People now can’t even imagine what it would be like to look a ferocious dinosaur in the eyes, but it may happen one day in the Future. Ray Bradbury paints this picture for us in his incredible story about this unbelievable mystery with figurative language and personification. “A Sound of Thunder” follows a big game hunter, Mr. Eckels, through a Time Safari of the Future and how he completely changes the world around him by disregarding the dangers of Time Travel,

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

Both share the same plot, and there are very little differences between the two. These are a few of the differences that I was able to notice between the book and the movie. There are several others throughout the story, but they are all just as minute and in the end they have no effect on the outcome of the story. Overall, I was very impressed with the movie and it was very true to the book. I have seen my share of movies that were adaptations from books that did not do the book justice, but this one is almost exactly like the book, so it was very

“In the previous story “ The sound of Thunder “there is a company that created a time machine letting people get through for 10,000 dollars to kill a dinosaur in a safari that is about to die. Eckles ( the main character) went to this challenge and went into the time machine. When they did that Eckles was very scared, and frustrated. A tree fell on the dinosaur and it was hurt. Travis ( the guide) saw that Eckles walked off of the path and he was furious with him, because he knows that something is going to be changed in the future. They started shooting at the dinosaur then they killed it. After this they took the bullets out of the dinosaur so it will not affect anyone, then they get to the time machine. When they get back they noticed that the way they spell things was different, and now they have a dictator as a president.

I didn’t pick the book over the movie because I think books are boring. When you are watching the movie you don’t have to use your brain that much. When I’m watching a movie about any type of genre that has a book that goes with it, I usually ask questions to myself (in my head) about

Whatever you do will have an effect in the world. In the story, The Sound of Thunder, by Ray Bradbury, Eckels, the main character, experienced this message in a very violent way. Although Eckels was brave, curious and courageous beyond measure, he is far from admirable because his selfish and impulsive behaviors made him unaware of his surroundings in ways that drastically harm others and the world around him. Eckels is not a good character in this story because of his bad acts. Ray Bradbury is basically expressing a good idea in a more elaborated version of it. He is saying that all actions have consequences. Eckels showed that by not thinking before acting and not trusting his power or instincts.

The book is better because it gives more excitement and emotion. The book just explains each of the events in great detail. I don’t know about other people, but for me the more information there is, the more I understand it. And in the movie of “The Outsiders”, it does not really say much about what’s going on. For instance, when Johnny dies, in the movie, Ponyboy goes home but it does not tell how long he had been out. In the book, Pony is walking home from the hospital and a man asked him if he wanted a ride (Hinton 151). Though others might think that the movie is better because it visualizes the events that are happening. But, even though it envisions what the book tells about does not mean that it is one hundred percent better.

In the story Eckles was going on a safari expedition back in time. He was told the rules that he had to obeid by. If he didn’t he would have to pay a very hefty fine of ten thousand of dollars. The safari people had a time machine that would take them back into time so they can hunt dinosaurs.

Society has led us to believe that what doesn't kill you actually makes you stronger. That there is no gain without pain. That a man’s blood, sweat, and tears will be all worth the struggle. The Roman poet Horace even once said that adversity can bring out talents which in a successful environment, would not exist. With all these assurances that difficult circumstances will meritable, it is hard to picture Horace’s statement being challenged.

Millions of years ago, hunting was a way of life, a way of survival. When cavemen killed an animal, they used every single piece of the animal and made certain to let none go to waste. In present day, hunting is viewed as a game. Many people hunt for the enjoyment that the adrenaline rush gives them. In this day and age, people can no longer hunt Saber-Tooth tigers, wooly mammoths, or dinosaurs, but what if there was a way to make that possible? A Sound of Thunder is a futuristic story of hunting prehistoric creatures. They could use a time machine to go back in time and hunt any animal they could dream of. The animals are carefully chosen before the hunt. If someone leaves minute traces of himself, the whole universe changes its course. A

I think the cry in the wild is better than the book because the movie explains more than the book. The movie tells you more you can see what he went through more of the secret you just wouldn’t have known that the way things are in the book were in the movie like it says brain’s mom cheated with a blond haired man, the man had brown hair and when Brian dropped his hatchet the book said he had pulled and tugged he didn’t have to pull and tug in the movie he just went under and got it. Some of the book and movie were the same like when brain ate raspberries and when he saw a bear and a wolf and finally and when the pilot had a heart attack and he saw the dead pilot

Upon studying children’s literature, one is likely to notice that throughout various texts, there are a number of common and recurring elements. One theme that is present in many stories is that of jungles and forests (for the purposes of this paper, these will be discussed as if they were one in the same). In Rudyard Kipling’s The Jungle Books and Lewis Carroll’s Through the Looking-Glass, we see both jungles and forests represented in different ways, however it can be argued that they serve similar functions in both texts. In both stories, forests and jungles are treated as liminal spaces, as a sort of limbo between one state of being and another. In The Jungle Books, the jungle that Mowgli and the animals live in is portrayed as the threshold at which the laws of man end and the laws of nature begin, while in Through the Looking-Glass, forests are portrayed as obstacles through which one must pass in order to reach a destination. Mowgli fulfils his destiny within the jungle by being raised there, while Alice passes through several forests in order to reach her place as queen on the chess board. Thus, forests and jungles in both texts function not only as liminal spaces, but as transformative agents which mold the protagonist into the person they must be in order to succeed in their story.