To Kill A Mockingbird: Comparing The Book And Movie

Ultimately the book was fantastic but the movie wasn’t as far as good in my personal opinion. It was one of the best books I’ve had ever read. At first it goes slow but as you get to know the characters and the plot you get addicted to the book and can’t stop reading in a good

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

To begin with, there are many similarities between the book and movie To Kill A Mockingbird. For example, Tom Robinson died in an attempt to escape from prison in both the book and the movie. In my opinion Tom's death was crucial to the original story, and I believe the movie would have been seen as over-sentimental if the scriptwriters had let him live. Another important similarity between the book and movie, is the mutual fascination

* They were caught by Atticus who told them to stop their nonsense and leave the man alone. Also told them to stop the play which jem accidently revealed to Atticus.

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 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

Just because a movie is based on a book doesn’t mean they will be exactly the same. Characters and settings can change, scenes might be added or deleted. To Kill A Mockingbird is no different. While there are many similarities, there are plenty of differences. Goals were set by producers and directors, specific actors were chosen to bring characters to life. This creates several differences that can be seen between the book and the movie.

“To Kill a Mockingbird” by Harper Lee, is an inspiring and amazing book. When you are reading the book, it is very easy to imagine what is happening. But, when you watch the movie, it is a little bit sad. It is emotionally sad, making you upset, not because of what is happening, but because it is so different. The book “To Kill a Mockingbird” is better than the movie, because the order is different, and the book included more characters and details.

In the beginning of the movie, it opens up with Scout singing and drawing/coloring. The first thing I noticed was the way the audience meets Dill in the book and the movie. In the book, we meet Dill relatively late and in the movie we meet him almost as soon as the movie starts. Dill is a key character and we don’t get to see that as much as I intended too. A few

One character that was missing from the movie that played an important role was Aunt Alexandra. First of all by having Aunt Alexandra in the film the reader doesn't see the feminine side to Scout instead only Scout's tomboy side is portrayed. Also, not having Aunt Alexandra around means there is no one to challenge Atticus's authority. Without Aunt Alexandra, Miss Stephanie is also left out. Seeing how Jem and Scout act around another family member is impossible when the directors' cut Aunt Alexandra out of the movie. Showing how the children act around another family member could show different sides of their personalities. A good explanation for leaving Aunt Alexandra out could be that the movie would have just been too long with too many extra parts that may have not been necessary. Rachael Haverford, the Finches' next door neighbor, was another character deleted from the book, Dill was not living with .The movie and the book have differences in the overall way the characters appear. For instance, Jem isn't nearly as physically fit in the movie as he is described in the book. Also in the book Scout is the main character and in the movie Scout doesn't really know what's going on. All of the scenes in the movie that present Scout as anything more than the narrator were cut out. In the book, Scout is more of a girl caught in the middle of Atticus and Alexandria. She acts a lot like Alexandria although she doesn't know it.

There are other significant similarities between the movie and the book, so if I overlooked or forgot any extremely crucial points, forgive me.

The relationship between the Finch children and Dill is shown in many different ways. The way that they talk to one another. Like how they stress the words in a sentence, or act around each other.

This novel was also turned into a movie in 1962. The movie and the book had both similarities and differences. For instance, the relationship between Atticus and the African Americans was a similarity between the book and the movie. On the other hand the absence of Aunt Alexandra in the movie was a prominent difference between the book and the movie. The book and the movie were both good ,but there were similarities and differences in each .

Here are some differences with the characters. Meg one of the main character's in the book has glasses and braces, but in the movie she doesn't have braces or glasses. Another main character is Charles-Walace and in the book he is five, doesn't go to school, and can't read, but in the movie he is six go's to school, and can read well. These are the differences

The major and optional characters and their storylines are more than adequate to drive the novel, however To Kill a Mockingbird accomplishes more than create Harper Lee's plot and subplots. It additionally catches the way of life of Maycomb, Alabama, in the 1930s and records the rhythms of day by day life. Through an astonishing, assorted gathering of minor characters, Maycomb wakes up on the pages of the novel, and human instinct is enlightened in ways that rouse seek after humankind or make outrage and despondency in respect how appallingly individuals can treat each other. Here and there the minor characters just inspire giggling as they exhibit how senseless individuals can be.