Of Mice and Men - Essay on Film Adaptation

Gary Sinise’s movie does create a powerful cinema, which in this case is a good imitation of the John Steinbeck novel. It shows exactly the images we get in our heads when we read the book, which makes it more convincing and also acknowledgeable. The movie also has music in it, which makes it a lot more dramatic than just reading the book. Gary Sinise also made the movie in detail of the book, which also makes the movie more convincing, seeing as the book gives a lot of details. Gary Sinise made the movie with the same message as John Steinbeck; he does not change any of morals that are shown in the book.

However, Gary Sinise did change some stuff, such as the building of the start and the end. In the beginning of the movie you see George and Lennie in weed running away, the railroad, the chase with the cowboys, dogs and horses and a lady is running too. But in the book, George and Lennie is already by the pool. I think the way Gary Sinise did it is better, because it starts off more dramatic and it gets the viewers more captivated, even from the beginning. Also in the ending you see a flashback right after George shoots Lennie and there are no characters involved. There are other small irrelevant scenes that are different as well. For example the scene where everybody is in town and Lennie enters Crooks’ room. In this scene Candy is not there, nor is Curley. Not only are the scenes differed from the book. A good example would be Slim. In the book he is represented as a divine character, while in the movie he is less heroic. Also the sense of emotions is different between the book and the movie. We see in the movie, when Curley’s wife is dead, Candy’s anger towards her is very intense. Also is the relationship between George and Curley’s wife different. In the movie, George seems to be cruel and careless towards her, whereas in the book, he seems to be at least a bit infatuated with her. These small changes makes the movie more unexpected than if everything was completely after the book.

One of the big scenes is the killing of Candy’s dog. There are many similarities such as the dialogs. But small details are different though, such as in the beginning, Candy is already lying on his bed, but in the movie he is walking in the room. The scene in the movie where Carlson is getting his gun is very detailed compared to the description in the book. The whole episode is a lot more detailed in the movie than it is in the book.
It is more suspenseful and you get more captivated by it. Whereas in the book they come to a conclusion a lot faster and it’s less interesting. Such small details occur, but are not taken notice of, unless studied carefully.

The scene where George shoots Lennie is also quite big. The movie makes that incident very dramatic and intense. While in the book, George just pops out of the brush, and it starts from there with the exact same dialog as in the movie. But in the movie, Lennie could not find the place where they had to meet if anything went wrong. Unlike in the book, where he already is at the place. It is a lot more suspenseful in the movie than it is in the book. Although John Steinbeck did a good job describing the place, it is still better to see exactly how it is in the movie. And it is a lot like the description in the book, which is very good, because it’s a beautiful place! So, it’s definitely very powerful cinema, while remaining true to the ‘spirit’ of the book. The shooting itself, in the movie, is very sudden, which makes it intense and shocking. In the book, George checks out where to hit Lennie exactly. And he hesitates once. After that there are no characters whatsoever. Only a flashback is shown…