Famous American columnist and film-critic, Richard Roeper, offers his insight into the differences between The Hunger Games novel and the novel's film adaptation.
A lot of people say that books are better than movies and do not give film adaptations a chance. Roeper, however, makes a good point in saying that you cannot truly compare a novel to a movie, as they are, as he states "apples and oranges." Roeper starts off by explaining how film adaptations must make sacrifices and changes in order to fit their allotted duration. He explains how the sacrifices that must be made cause differences in certain characters being either more (Haymitch) or less (Rue) developed than in the book. Just because a film adaptation does not contain every single detail found in a book, does not make the book necessarily better. A book is a book; and a movie is a movie.
This video contains a lot of interesting little factoids about the movie as well. Check it out!
No comments:
Post a Comment