The Fault In Our Stars : Movie

IMG_6644

Usually when I review a book that is also a movie, I would compare the two. But in the case of TFIOS I don’t think it would be fair. Obviously there are some changes from the book to the movie, characters missing, moments not shared but if I were to name these things, list them out and discuss them I would just me grasping at straws.

John Green said in an interview that the movie is so good and so true because it captures the “essence” of the book. When I first heard him say this I didn’t know what be meant.

The thing that I love about reading is the way that certain books can make you feel after you have finished them. Like you were a part of that world. Like those characters were real people. But when it’s over you feel like you have lost a part of yourself. Like a real friend is gone. In some cases you also get the sense that although the book is finished the story isn’t over. That is the essence of the book.

That is the feeling I got when I finished John Greens novel. It is also how I felt after watching the movie.

In my opinion, which may not necessarily be accepted by everyone, the movie is great. Because even though minor things were changed it captured the essence of the book.

Many book to movie adaptations don’t capture the essence of a book. The fault in our stars most certainly did.

Advertisements

Book to Movie Comparisons: Percy Jackson and The Sea of Monsters

IMG_6605

Much like the first Percy Jackson movie, Sea of Monsters contained many changes when converted from the book to screen. However, after extended amounts of time thinking deeply (probably way too deeply) about the conversion, I’ve come to realise it wasn’t so bad. The plot is practically similar, Percy, Annabeth and Percy’s new-found Cyclops brother Tyson go on a search to find the golden fleece and save grover. They get help from Hermes, run into Luke on the Princess Andromeda and even let Clarisse take the fleece back to camp half-blood and place on Talia’s tree.

The only part that really frustrates me about this movie, is the unnecessary addition of Kronos’ rising. In a way it is important to establish why Luke wanted the fleece so much, but when they add things into the movie, that aren’t even in the book, it tends to get on my nerves. The battle with Polyphemus in the book is much longer, more troublesome and more climactic. If they had spent more time trying to get that scene right in the movie, they would not have needed to add Kronos’ rising as the climax of the movie.

On a positive note, I do think they managed to portray Percy’s feelings towards Tyson, and his father accurately. Percy’s feelings of Jealousy and confusion about Tyson were portrayed nicely by Logan Lerman in the movie. ¬†Although they managed to make a better film this time around, and stick to the book slightly better, I do wish they added the link between Grover and Percy, or when Annabeth learns her fatal flaw from the Sirens.

Other than that it was a good movie, not great, but good. As always, the book is better than the movie.

Book to Movie Comparison: Divergent

IMG_6367

WARNING! SPOILERS AHEAD!

 

I recently was able to go see the movie adaptation of Veronica Roth’s Divergent. I could be very nit picky and go into great detail about all the changes, but there was really only a few that I found really irritating. ¬†The first being Peters personality.

In the book, Peter has a very significant personality that consists mostly of violence and brutality. In the movie however, these aspects of his character were dulled down. Its evident he is still a jerk, but I felt there was still something missing. Not showing the violent side to his character, and the lengths he would go to, to show he was best (Including the eye-stabbing) will make it harder to understand the importance of his attempted change in the later books/movies. It wont be as significant to those watching.

Secondly, where is Uriah? Uriah is a much loved character in the novels, and leaving him out of the first movie seemed like torture. His name is seen on the ranking board, and there is a Uriah look-a-like during the Zipline scene, but there was no actual Uriah. He will be in the next movies, but, much with Peters personality, I think it will be difficult to have the shock factor of his Divergence without the background story. The shock definitely wont be as prominent.

Thirdly, Tris’s fear landscape. Not only did they reduce her six fears to five (Four and Five simply does not have the same ring to it as Four and Six) the changed her intimacy fear to border on sexual assault. For a fan of the books, this seemed like an unnecessary addition to her fears, and was just downright uncomfortable for us all.

There were other changes that I didn’t like at first, but after reconsideration, decided they weren’t so bad.

The altered ending which featured Jeanine shutting down the simulation annoyed me a little at first, but after a while I think that the increased amount of appearances of Jeanine aided in the character development, and I cant wait to see what Kate Winslet does next with the character.

At first, the part where Tris is told that she is out of dauntless, seemed unnecessary to me. I soon realised it was there to portray how desperate Tris was to be a part of the Dauntless, and to prove to everyone that she was brave enough, and worth it. It was a great way to capture Tris’s thoughts, without her having to say anything.

The movie did stay relatively close to the novel and often took likes directly from the book. Overall it’s a great movie and captured the world Tris lives in perfectly. It’s a must see movie, but I recommend reading the books first. Like always the book it better than the movie.

Book to Movie Comparisons: Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief

IMG_6351blog

 

 

To start off this new piece where I compare books to their movie counterparts, I chose a good one. Percy Jackson and The Lightning Thief has so many flaws when it comes to staying true to the book. The biggest problem, I think, lies within the plot itself, and progression of the characters on their quest. In the book, Percy, and most others believe that Hades, has taken the lightning bolt, in hopes of starting a war among the gods. Percy goes on this quest to the underworld to get the bolt from Hades and return it to Zeus before a war breaks out. The movie, in some ways, follows this plot. Percy does want to prove his innocence, and he does so by going to the underworld, but his primary reason for going, is to save his mother. In the book, we know he fails to do so. Also, the book is all about them getting to the underworld as fast as possible, it just so happens that they encounter many dangerous monsters along the way, many that aren’t seen in the movie. The movie shows the characters try to find ‘Persephone’s pearls’ before going to the underworld. The biggest flaw in this is that in Greek mythology, there is no such thing as Persephone’s pearls. If you’re not going to stick to the book at least stick to the myths.

Other differences, like the fact that Mr D, Clarrise, and Thalia’s tree are never mentioned in the first movie, are small but significant. I can deal with the age differences between the book and movie, and the different entrances into the underworld, but I don’t understand how Kronos is never mentioned in the first movie considering he is the main focus of the series, or the fact that Ares was working along side Luke in the hopes of starting a war. The movie is missing a lot of good things, like Echidna, Chimera, Procrustes and even Charon, with his Elvis suits.

Overall, The movie could have been better, it definitely did not do the book justice, and may as well have been a completely unrelated story all together. Its a shame when things like this happen, because those who don’t read the books, have no idea what they’re missing out on. I can only hope that the next movies will do a better job at doing the book justice.

 

Like always, Book Triumphs over Film.