Preview

Shawshank Book vs Film

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
771 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Shawshank Book vs Film
Shawshank Redemption
"Rita Haywort and the Shawshank Redemption was first presented in 1982, by Stephen King and hooked the hearts of the world's readers. Literature reviews were immediately written about the book and quickly recognized as one of the years best. Rek Rehn, a book reviewer for Mouth Shut.com Wrote: "This book is the jewel of the crown, a tender tale of hope, friendship and retribution." Years later in 1994, Shawshank Redemption was again recognized by a wider audience. It was released as a major motion picture directed by Frank Darabont. The film presented very respectable actors, such as Morgan Freeman and Tim Robbins. "The Shawshank Redemption creates a warm hold on our feelings because it makes us a member of a family. Many movies offer us vicarious experiences and quick, superficial emotions. Shawshank slows down and looks," said Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times. Although Shawshank Redemption is a excellent film, it is interesting to see that three obvious times the movie goes astray are when the director Mr. Darabont, chose to revise Kings book. It was not a good idea in all three cases. Steven king was the one with the better idea.
The first case is the beer scene. In the book, the guard gives beer to the inmates re-tarring the roof, as Andy had asked just like in the film, but the beer is warm in the book. Red even makes the point that it did not matter. "That beer was piss-warm, but is was still the best I ever had in my life" (37). Just drinking a beer in the sunlight made him feel like a free man. In the film the beer is served on ice. This does not make a very good point. Clancy Brown played Byron Hadley, captain of the guard, who was a nasty and brutal man that had the position of the warden's right hand man. A guy who gives beatings left and right each time showing the audience a little more about whom his character really is. There's no way he would have done one extra thing than the minimum his deal with Andy

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Shawshank Redemption (1994) is a spectacular feature film directed by Frank Darabont who adapted Stephen King’s novella Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption (Different Seasons collection). First things first, the poster of the movie has these words “Fear can hold you prisoner, Hope can set you free” on it. This quote clearly explains the power of hope freedom. Now moving to the movie itself, there have been many amazing prison dramas in the past so how does Shawshank Redemption filled with so many clichés differ from them? The movie is spread across a long period of time letting the simplest things take a fuller meaning the smallest details have their importance. This is what makes the main difference. In a place where everything has…

    • 245 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    In the cinematic adaptation of Shawshank Redemption by Rita Hayworth there are several significant changes seen in moments by Stephen King's story and Darabont's film version. The first moment that captured the difference between the story and film is when a young convict named Tommy comes to Shawshank prison who later expresses to Andy that he knows what really happen to Andy's wife and lover is suddenly killed by the warren in the movie. However, in the story it says "Tommy Williams is no longer an inmate of this facility" which indicates that Tommy might not have been killed and instead was transferred to another prison. The second moment is when Brooks a prisoner who has been locked for fifty years is rewarded parole but died..." in a home…

    • 285 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The characters had been very much different. From the novel and to the movie, they had not even included the character under the name of Reuven. As well as, Rivka was introduced at the beginning instead of when they had met her at the camp in the novel. As well as, in the movie, the rabbi spoke out much more than in the novel. In the novel, the rabbi faded out of the novel as it went on. The plot from the novel and the movie was very different too. In the novel, the people caught escaping were shot, yet in the movie they were hung. In the movie, they had a Seder in the camp yet in the novel, they did not. As well as, in the movie, they had put pellets into the chamber to kill people, yet they didn't do that in the novel. They had other smaller details included that were different, yet they did not have any impact on the story, such as how they had to dig instead of doing their special jobs like in the…

    • 1189 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Why is it that when a book gets it’s own movie that there are several differences between the book and the movie? Some people argue that the book is always better than the movie. There is a reason for this. Firstly, in most book to movie adaptations small details are changed or are just not included. Secondly, the movie often takes short cuts and doesn’t touch on certain aspects that were described in the book. Lastly, when reading a book you are free to make your own subtext and fill in the blanks with your imagination. The movie adaptations of books have always lacked the detail that's in the book, some things are completely cut from the movie to maintain a well paced story, and it fills in the gaps for us making the experience less unique.…

    • 573 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The second comparable scene is when the Socs and Greasers line up to fight each other. They are smack-talking back and forth with each other. Two similarities between the book and the movie could be the sound of the greasers and socs talking back and forth, and it both showed or described how the greasers and socs were lining up. Two differences between the book and the movie could be instead of Paul swinging at Darry, some random Soc swung at Ponyboy, and the empty lot looked different than what I had imagined when the book described it.The book was more effective during this scene because It gave more detail about how the lot looked like and it described the feeling better than the movie…

    • 482 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Ever read a book, and then seen the movie? The book is usually better right? That’s most likely because of the differences. The book is more descriptive most of the time. Events in the book are missing from the movie. Or the movie adds some in.…

    • 219 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Director Frank Darabont wrote and directed the film “The Shawshank Redemption” which was based on a novella by Stephen King. “The Shawshank Redemption” touches our hearts and creates warmth in our feelings as it makes us a member of the family as Frank Darabont tells the slow and gentle tale of loving friendship and hope. A Shawshank newcomer (White guy who worked in a bank) in 1946 Andy Dufresne (Tim Robbins), bangs up a 20-year friendship with a black guy named Red (Morgan Freeman) while in prison. It uses the sweet, soothing and soft voice overs of Red to include us in the story of men forming a community in prison. It isn’t one of those films where it offers us quick, in cloud nine feelings. It accomplishes in avoiding the familiar.…

    • 497 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Have you ever read a book, then watched the movie on it and wanted to throw the book at the director’s face and tell them to actually read the book? This is what happened when I read a novel titled Where The Rivers Flow North by Howard Frank Mosher, and then watched the movie on it. In 1927, in Kingdom County, Vermont, a large dam is to be built; however, Noel Lord, a logger and cedar-oil harvester, won't give up his lifetime lease on the land. The dam company increases its offer of cash, but Noel refuses time after time. He asks for a trade; the white pines for his lease. Noel, meanwhile, talks with his wife, Bangor, about them moving to Oregon and buying a saw mill. She wants him to take the company's money; but he’s stubborn. His stubbornness is what ultimately leads them to their death, causing them both to be victims. Yet in the movie, only one of them meets with their untimely death. Between the book and the movie, three major differences were Noel’s death scene, Bangor’s death, the showing of the panther and Noel becoming a legend and story to tell just like his ancestors. I’m not satisfied with these differences because they don’t portray the book accurately. These key differences can really impact ones thoughts on both the book and the movie and the way one feels about how the director and producers of the movie chose to represent the book.…

    • 1007 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Blind Side

    • 568 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Another noticeable change in the movie verses the book was the emphasis on the different characters. The main character was indisputably Michael Oher in both the book and the movie. However, the movie put a strong emphasis on Leigh Anne Touhy (who was played by Sandra Bullock) and presented her as the second most major character aside from Michael. The book, on the other hand, had a lot more facts about Sean that the movie never presented. Leigh Anne was a key player in both, but in the movie, she seemed to be so much more of a main character that the other characters that stood out in the book did not do so in the movie. The major example of that was Sean Touhy who seemed to be the first one to invest in Michael in the book unlike the movie where he played a more quiet and uninvolved role in Michael's life. There were other subtle differences that could be noticed, like having the necessary GPA for an NCAA scholarship be 2.5 (movie) instead of 2.56 (book) which led to another problem to work around, or having Michael's fight be with the gang members in his old neighborhood (movie) instead of with one of his teammates at Ole Miss (book). Overall, however, the movie attempted to portray an accurate account of the book which made it enjoyable to read and watch both.…

    • 568 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The book The Outsiders is written by S.E Hinton. It is a book about two gangs called the Socs and the Greasers. They have different social groups and it makes them to where they do not get along. The book was also turned into a movie it was directed by Francis Ford Coppola. There are many differences between the book and the movie. The differences worth pointing out are that Dally was accused of slashing someones tires in the movie not in the book, that Johnny was not jumped in the movie but he was jumped in the book.…

    • 488 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    There are many differences between the movie and the book. First the positive points: This film attaches faces to Scout, Jem, Miss Maudie, and Dill, since no description of their faces is given in the book. Also, the film has some genuinely hilarious moments, particularly the scene where Scout is dressed as a ham and walking through the forest. Another good point is that the acting was superb and a treat to watch. Gregory Peck, who played Atticus, was captivating. The film is cast very well. The novel does not give physical descriptions of Scout, Jem, Miss Maudie, and Dill, but the film characters were believable. The actors look like what we would expect them to look like.…

    • 690 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The movie Of Mice And Men by John Steinbeck starts with a woman running guys on horses with ravenous dogs that we can only guess are the main characters. If you read the book, then watch the movie you know all the things that happened. Though There are some features in the movie that are different than the book. Therefore some parts of the book were left out of the movie.…

    • 527 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Kesey and Darabont explore the constant battle between hope and oppression, a prominent theme throughout One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest and Shawshank Redemption, respectively. Both utilise a wide range of techniques, such as messianic imagery, symbols, and a size-motif developing the influence of power. The battle between hope and oppression is constant throughout the two texts by each author, in unique ways and different perspectives, through which the audience gains the understanding that hope and oppression come hand in hand with life.…

    • 1046 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    One thing in particular that the book does much better is making use of complex metaphors and themes, such as: the river for life, and oneness with nature, that string themselves together as you turn each page of the book, while in the movie the metaphors and symbolism are represented in a much different way through picture. In the book, both themes regarding the river are very vivid and clear, as they use strong imagery of nature to draw pictures in the minds of the readers. In the movie both themes are represented and referred to much less because of the lack of narration.…

    • 1118 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    There are many ways in which both the novel and film can relate to one another but then have its own unique differences…

    • 706 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays