Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Persepolis (The Movie)
Last week I asked you guys for your thoughts on the book, this week I'll ask for your thoughts on the movie. Again, nothing rigidly academic here, did you like it, hate it, not feel much towards it? How did it compare to the book for you? As usual, 250 word post up by Thursday night (10/13) and 100 word response up by Sunday night (10/16).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
After seeing the movie, I was slightly disappointed. When all my friends would always say how the book is always better than the movie, I never really believed them. With the types of books that interest me, I have yet to see any of them in the movies, so I was never put in that situation. I would always talk to my friends and told them they were crazy for liking a book more than a movie. Finally, I can relate to them. While watching the movie I saw that many of the important parts (well at least I thought were important) were excluding while making the movie. In the movie, we weren't informed on how Satrapi's family was rather wealthy. Also, In the movie we were not introduce to her maid, who I believe played a rather large role in one of the "themes" of the book. I thought that social classes should have been mentioned in the movie at some point. Although the movie didn’t have many of the details the book did, I did enjoy it. I liked to see the difference between each of the different types of media, and I enjoyed the special effects they put in. I thought that the movie was overall enjoyable, but I believe you have to had read the book because to me I wouldn’t have understood certain parts with out having some background information on it.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed the movie version of Persepolis. I do think that I liked the book better, but the movie wasn’t bad at all. I found it interesting how it was essentially the graphic novel put in motion. Rather than film actual actors or recreate the cartoon characters, the movie took exactly how the pictures were displayed in the book and set them to motion. I really enjoyed this because, besides a few scenes from the plot, there was virtually no difference between the two except for the type of media that was used to convey the story. As a result of this, the viewer could not argue that the characters or events were not how they pictured them in their minds. I also really liked how the movements of the characters and the sounds and voices said a lot that even the book couldn’t display. The tone of voice along with the facial expressions of the characters told the audience exactly how the characters were feeling so there was no room for confusion. Also, the way the characters moved and the fading between scenes aided a lot in getting a certain point across to the audience. There was one scene in particular when the war was going on and a bomb had just exploded. The screen then faded to all black except for a single white key in the middle of the screen contrasting the dark background. This scene was really powerful and was something that the book could not have done.
ReplyDeleteAt first I was excited to watch the movie of Persepolis because I figured it would help identify the characters as people. I always like to see the difference in movies and how I played books out in my mind, from what the character looks like to what their voice sounds like. The movie of Persepolis was disappointing. It seemed pointless to me because it was literally the pictures from the book with a voice over. It was the same as reading the book except some of the important scenes were cut out. I know the movie was based on simplicity, but I think it would have used a little more embellishment. There were certain parts that would have only been understandable if you had read the book. I will admit I am biased because I have always believed books are better than movies. Also, I probably would have liked it more if it were in English. Because I had to read subtitles, I couldn’t look at their facial expressions, which gave away a lot of how they felt. I think it would have been better if the characters were turned into animations rather than the same black and white figures from the book. It was not an awful movie, it was entertaining and gave the viewer a different perspective than they had from looking at pictures with captions, but I would definitely recommend reading the book!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI was excited to watch Persepolis because I really enjoyed reading the book and I always like to see how movies differ from the book. I am definitely one of those people that believe books are better than movies. There is no way that you can capture all of the ideas and details that are incorporated into a book in a movie. I enjoyed watching Persepolis, but the book gave me an overall better understanding of her life. I felt like there were scenes in the movie that were left out that were vital to the comprehension of Satrapi’s life. I think I may have had problems understanding the whole thing if I had not read the book. However, I do think that the movie was able to give a clearer visual effect. I thought that in the movie the scenes were played out more dramatically than they appeared in the book. For example, there’s one where Satrapi is improperly veiled and the two women guardians stop her on the street. I thought this scene was able to really show the harshness of the guardians better than the book did. Also, I think the having to read subtitles in the movie definitely took away from what you saw. I do not think it allowed you to really focus on the scene as a whole and took away from the meaning or what you were meant to get out of it. I enjoyed watching the movie but I liked the book better.
ReplyDeleteThe movie Persepolis was different than any movie I have seen before. Its cartoon image related almost exactly to the book and made it into real life which I liked. I also liked how the movie was portrayed in an identical replication of the book, leaving out a few minor scenes and details. The movie was in subtitles which I usually dislike, but I feel like it helped make the movie seem more real to Satrapi’s life. The movie brought the book to life even though it was still played by cartoons. I feel like Satrapi put a lot of thought and work into the movie. She wanted it to tell the same story as the book. Even though a lot of scenes were left out, I felt like she used the most important ones that still followed her life true to herself. A lot of times when books become movies, the director changes around major details. Sometimes they even change the entire ending to create a more dramatic one. Luckily for us who enjoyed the book were happily surprised with the replication of the text into film. Another thing I liked about the film was the sound quality, meaning voices, crashes, explosions, music, and other actions. The noises in the background definitely helped portray a better image of the book. Personally I enjoyed the movie over the book just because I normally prefer films over text, but I feel like for Persepolis, the movie helped me make it seem more realistic and brought all of the events to life.
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, I wasn’t very excited to watch Persepolis the movie because I have never liked cartoons. It bothers me how their mouths do not move at the correct time when they speak. I am also especially against black and white, I find it to be extremely annoying. Regardless, when the movie started, I had an open mind since I enjoyed the book for the most part. I also had never read a book and watched a movie that went along with it, so I was excited to see how they compared and contrasted. Overall, I kind of had the same opinion for the movie as I did for the book. I liked the beginning when Marji was a little girl, but as she grew older, I lost all interest. I really could care less if her boyfriend turned out to be gay, she turned into a drug addict, tried killing herself, had nothing in common with her old friends, and grew to hate her husband. That is all useless information for me. I also did not like how the movie left certain scenes out. If I had just watched the movie and not read the book, I would not have known that Satrapi’s family was wealthy. One positive critique I will give the movie is I liked how it started off at a different point, in color, and ended the same way. It left the ending off with a better, more positive feeling and the hope that Satrapi’s future was going to be much brighter.
ReplyDeleteI thought the movie stayed pretty true to the book, so it was still alright. I’m indifferent to it. Not great, not terrible. It’s strange comparing a graphic novel and a movie when they are actually quite similar in the visual context. When seeing a movie adaptation of a normal book, readers are completely challenged because the context of the book from the point of view of the reader is normally so visually different to what the director pictured while adapting the novel to a screen play. Because the drawings were almost exactly the same in its style in the movie and in the book, it really didn’t offer me any new perspective to view the story. So watching really just reinforced the plot, and aided me in seeing further details I might have missed the first time around. I was actually surprised that the movie left out the scene where Marjane’s mother came to visit her in Vienna. I thought this had a decent impact on her trying to stick it out in Vienna. I was also surprised that Marjane’s time in Vienna seemed very short, and quite less depressing then she seemed to be in the book. Throughout the second half of the novel, Marjane seemed to constantly turn to smoking, and drug abuse to deal with her depression. I liked that the movie shortened these scenes. Some of the movements of the characters also helped portray a snake-like personality. So overall it seemed like the same exact thing, but the movie did have some aspects that did improve its plot.
ReplyDeleteThe movie Persepolis in my opinion was better than the book because I think that the movie was more strait forward and to the point. The was more detailed and had more information of Marjane Satrapi's life, but the movie was more strait forward and cut out some of the irrelevant scenes that were in the book. The movie and the book were also very similar and that seemed to me to be a very good thing and the movie was filmed in the same way the book was written. The movie was in the same cartoonish style of the pictures in the book. I also thought that the movie graphics were good and that it was well done. I would recommend the book and movie to other people to read and watch because they were both very well done. Also I thought that the movie was interesting to watch in subtitles. I feel that watching movies with subtitles helps you to really pay attention during it and it keeps you more aware of certain details that are spoken by the different characters. The movie was also very particular in describing the emotions of the characters as well. The book did a good job too but the movie seemed to be better in showing the emotions and reactions of the characters. The scenes and the overall story line was decent and I enjoyed watching the film. However the book and the movie were both done by Satrapi and I think this helped in making the movie to be better than the book.
ReplyDeleteI was really surprised that the movie was animated, for some reason I was convinced that the movie would have real people and real actors in it. However, it makes sense that the movie would be animated because the book was a comic strip. For the most part I found that the book and the movie were very similar. Some of the differences I found that were some chapters of the book seemed to be missing from the movie. For an example, the chapter “The Letter” seemed to be missing completely from the book. I also noticed that the chapter with Mali and her children was not included in the movie. I feel that this chapter ("The Jewels") was an excellent portrayal of the civil war brewing in Iran. Mali, Mrs. Satrapi, and their children were in the grocery store when two women started insulting them. I really feel like they should have added this chapters into the film, the missing chapters ads key elements to the storyline. On the other hand I do understand why the director might have not wanted to chapters in the film, the chapter “The Letter” adds another character so maybe he wanted to cut down on the introduction of different people. Many other chapters in the novel talk about the fighting within Iran itself. For instance, every scene depicting religious cooperation (wearing a veil, no western clothing, no alcohol) can pertain to the battle raging between the citizens of Iran. The director might of wanted to avoid a bias view.
ReplyDeleteCompared to the book, the movie version of Persepolis was more to the point and clear than the book. I felt as though the book dragged on with small details than just getting straight to the main point. I am usually one of those people who prefer books over movies because of its details but in the case of Persepolis, I felt as though some parts were redundant and it just dragged on. The movie gave more me understanding of the characters because of their movements, facial expressions, and tone which captured how they felt that I couldn’t see in the book. Even though I prefer the movie version of Persepolis, I feel like I would not have understood Persepolis fully if I did not read the book. I would of much rather enjoyed the movie better if the pictures were in color thank just plain old black and white, but overall the movie illustrated the book well enough to put in the important details. I would have also enjoyed the movie more if it was in English because personally I don’t like subtitled movies very much and reading them, it wasn’t the same as the characters speaking direct that me. Overall, I enjoyed the movie better than the book but it was not a movie I would pay money and go to the movie theater for. It story plot was well built, adding humor to serious topic such of the Islamic Revolution which Satrapi had to go through growing up under the Iranian regime.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed the movie more, for the simple fact that I didn't have to do anything but sit there and watch it. I know this sounds lazy but its true. I much prefer being able to sit back and take in information that is presented through animation, sound and voices than have to read it on a piece of paper. I know films can never hold the information a book can but I much prefer to see actions rather than words. I appreciate the books content and the way you it manages to put its point across with words, facial expressions and body gestures. I understand the thought that went into to each scene and how difficult it would have been to display emotion. I value the use of darkness in the background to show certain emotions and other techniques to display feelings.
ReplyDeleteObviously reading the book made the movie much easier to understand however as the two were so similar I believe even if I didn’t do the former, I would have been just as educated on the story. I didn’t believe certain information left out of the movie would have made much difference to how I feel about the book.
I’m a guy who appreciates special effects and relevant background music, not one who really pays much attention to descriptive writing or clever use of words. I don’t see this as a bad thing; I’m just more of a practical person. Therefore, if I had to chose one way of discovering this film it would defiantly be the movie.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI personally enjoyed the movie more. I have always been a bit more of a visual learner and even though the book was full of pictures i felt seeing the movement and hearing the voices made it a bit more real for me. Also the movie was fairly short so your concentration levels are high the whole time, where as with the book I did start to get a bit bored and drift off sometimes. The movie enabled Satrapi to show the snake like movements of the women where as the book couldn't, there were a few parts like this that made the movie stand out for me. Although I do agree with some people that the movie missed out some key points like who’s hand was under the rubble. Although in the movie the use of music, camera angle and facial expression let you know that the person that has died was someone very close to Marjane. If i had never read the book however i wouldn't have known about the withheld information and the movie would have still made perfect sense and being as powerful. I guess I just enjoyed hearing Marjane's voice even if it was in French. I felt more connected to the characters in the movie as to it the book, they just seemed more real. It is just easier to not only convey emotions, and conflict with the use of film and also easier to take in. The book was effective but the movie just appealed to me more.
ReplyDeleteI definitely enjoyed the book a lot more than the movie. I felt as though I obtained a lot more info along with understood what points Marjane Satrapi was trying to relay to her readers. Although I believe the movie did a good job trying to get most of these points across, there was still a lot of info missing. One example that I remember was the scene of the key. In the book, there was a deep explanation of what they key meant to both the soldier and their families. It was hard for the families to look at the key and realize that’s what they were told to believe how they would enter heaven. The death of a soldier was downplayed and had a lack of importance when referring to this object. Although this was true, many young soldiers believed what they were told. This showed the importance it had to oneself in battle. In the movie however, there was no description of its importance. It was presented in a simple image when the cartoon soldiers died in battle. This image provided no meaning along with the lack of individualism. This key meant a great deal to each and every family, which was completely lost in the movie. Now don’t get me wrong, it is hard to provide every detail from a book in a movie, but some key ingredients are needed. Without descriptions like these, the story can be completely ruined and at least misunderstood.
ReplyDeleteI definitely liked reading Persepolis the book, rather than watching the movie. I’m not saying that I thought the movie was bad, but it wasn’t as clear as the book. I feel like the movie left out a lot of important scenes that were in the book which made it easier to follow. I think I would have been confused while watching the movie if I hadn’t read the book beforehand. It was cool to see Satrapi’s pictures come to life on the screen with added music and sound effects but I like to picture stories in my mind and think of how the scene would feel instead of having someone tell me. Whenever I read a book and then watch the movie version of it, I feel like the movie never lives up to the book. Also the fact that the movie was in French with subtitles made it harder to understand what was happening. When I’m watching a movie I like to be able to listen and look at the screen to really feel for the characters. The subtitles make this difficult to do so then it was even harder to know what was going on in the movie. I like to read books that have a lot of detail and description and I feel like the movie took a lot of that away. I realize that the movie would be way to long if it could include all the details of the book, but maybe it shouldn’t have been made into a movie then. Persepolis the movie was okay, but I prefer the detail and description of the book.
ReplyDeleteAfter I watched the movie, I had mixed feelings about which I enjoyed better. The movie was better able to show the different angles and perspectives of the different scenes in the book. Also they were able to more easily flow the story by removing the pieces that hindered the flow. However the book was much more intimate and you were told more of the pieces of her life that were obviously more important to her, even though they were cut out of the movie. However I liked the movie less than the book, because I’m much more likely to sit down and read the book then watch a movie, or ill at least read it first. I really liked them both and they each had their own individual appeal in different ways. The movie showed Satrapi’s story in a different way then she intended it, and it enhanced the importance of her story by having it shown in another media, which would have targeted a different audience then the book would have.
ReplyDeleteIn response to EmilyTan, this movie was defiantly different than any other movie I have watched in the past. With the cartoon like figures it made it very interesting. It corresponded directly to the books with the way the characters look and how I imagined they would act. Although I did like the book better, I enjoyed watching the movie because it was another source or way to see how Marjane felt and how she acted. I would have enjoyed the movie a little bit more if they had all of the details as the book did.
ReplyDeleteI am often disappointed by the movie versions of books after I read them. However, I was not with this one. While I do believe that some scenes should not have been left out of the movie, I, for the most part, did understand their thought process with including only the scenes that were of more overall importance and impact in the story. I didn't like how certain things were changed however. Be they for legal reasons or not, some things just should have been left alone if at all possible, but then that's just my opinion. I hate changes being made to characters when the story goes from book format to movie format. It just confuses me and complicates the story more in my mind because I am expecting something or someone other than what or who I am seeing in the movie, as opposed to the book. I really liked the animations. They were generally simple which I appreciated but they still managed to get their point across as they did in the book. I wish that Satrapi focused more on her friends both as a child and as an adult. I think that area of her life and her story could have been a little bit more clearly described. I believe that it would have helped the audience understand more of the reasons behind Marjane's development as a child and the explanation behind her strange friendships throughout her life. However, for what its worth, I did enjoy the movie.
ReplyDeleteI agree with haley.k. I liked watching the movie version of Persepolis, but really enjoyed reading the book. The main reason I prefer the book was exactly what haley.k said: when you compare the two, the book had a lot more detail. So many parts were omitted in the movie that if I had not read the book prior, like her, I would have been lost at some of the parts. Also the subtitles were distracting. A movie is always much better without subtitles because you can focus all your attention on the characters instead of reading the words at the bottom.
ReplyDeleteEven though I did enjoy the movie more, I did not totally dislike the movie. I did like how they chose to make it into an animation instead of choosing actors. It was cool to see the pictures come to life with movements and more realistic emotions. Even though the emotions were portrayed more realistically, the book was definitely easier to connect with on an emotional level. In the book there was more details of her life that made her seem like a real person and not just a character. In the book I was able to understand what kind of person Marjane was through out her life better than I was in the movie. I know that it would be impossible to fit all the details in the movie that the book had without making it several hours, but if I had not read the book first I would have not enjoyed the story line as much. While I was watching the movie I filled in the gaps of the story that they did not mention. Also I found it hard to completely watch the movie and concentrate on the picture because I had to constantly read the subtitles. What I found interesting about the movie that was a lot different from the book was that the movie started out as the end and her telling the story of her life, instead of her starting out as a child. I also appreciated the fact that they made the present in color and the past in black and white. I still would definitely recommend the book over the movie to anyone.
ReplyDeleteIn response to cptak, I defitely agree that a movie could never be as good as the book because there is no way that the movie can capture all of the details that the book has. I also agree that I would have had a harder time understanding and following the movie if I did not read to book first. I knew all the background information and the details that the movie did not have so I just filled in the gaps. And I feel like most people agree on having to read the subtitles took away a little bit of the movie because you had to look away from the picture to read them.
ReplyDeleteWhen seeing the movie, it was quite interesting in some way and quite disappointing in others. I liked the way that the movie was portrayed as a flashback rather than a memoir. Another interesting bit is they way the characters in the movie moved about, there was a scene with two elderly women that moved towards marjane in a snake like motion, there was no way they could have portrayed that kind of movement in the book. However I do still find that the movie missed out a bit. There were certain scenes of interest that were not even mentioned at all. The scene when marjanes mother came to visit her in Vienna was left out even though I thought that was important, as it was when her mother recognized her as a grown woman when she asked with marjane. I can understand some scenes would have to be left out to fit certain time frames yet I do believe maybe something else could have been dropped. It may be ridiculous to not like a movie because it is not in my native language but the fact that I had to read the subtitles for the entirety of the movie didn’t help me follow what was going on as rarely finished reading what was being said before someone else spoke or another sentence was being said.
ReplyDeleteIn response to what most people have said, I enjoyed reading the book more than watching the movie. The book was so much more enjoyable and as you may already know, I have read it twice! The movie definitely did not capture my attention as well as how the book did. There was just an element missing, it may be because I already knew the story well and therefore did not need to pay full attention to it. However I still did find there were some good things about the movie, such as the portrayal of motion and the ending did not seem rushed.
ReplyDeleteIn response KaylaJohnson, I was also disappointed with the movie. People I know that have read Twilight and Harry Potter always say that the books are always better than the movie, but I never understood why. Now I understand. I think if I had watched the movie first and then read the book I would have enjoyed the movie more. The movie left out a lot of important details that the book had. For example, If I had just watched the movie, I would not have known how wealthy Marjane's family was and how permissive her parents were.
ReplyDeleteIn response to amypar, I too thought that the book and movie were similar in visual context. I think that had the movie been with real characters and no animation like every other movie, the meaning might have been taken differently. I do not think it offered me any new perspective to her story either. It helped me understand a few parts of the book that I was a little confused about, but it did not provide me with anything different. I also thought there were vital scenes missing from the movie that were in the book, and the one where Marjane’s mother came to visit her is a perfect example.
ReplyDeleteIn responde to LMccarthy, I agree that the movie was essentially the book in motion. The transitions between the frames helped smooth out the slightly more choppy rhythm of the book. The fact that they kept the story animated rather than using real actors and making it a live action movie was much appreciated by me as well. I believe that it added more to the story especially as a child telling half of the story. I almost felt as if I could relate a little more to it because it stayed true to the book and was animated rather than being made into a live-action film.
ReplyDeleteIn response to miya.a I agree that the movie was much more to the point and focused compared to the book. But I think you might be right, that if I had not read the book before hand, I might have been slightly confused seeing the movie. I actually liked that the movie stayed black and white. For some reason it kind of bothered me when there were bits and pieces in color in the movie. It made no sense to only have a few minutes of the movie in color. I also agree that the facial expressions and movements of the characters help you to fully understand their personality.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Lairdy, I too am a lazy learner. I take in information visually easier than I do just writing and taking notes. yes there were pictures in the book but pictures and videos don’t compare. its much easier to just relax and receive the story in movie form than to sit there turning pages. Granted you gain more information from the book but I felt as though If I was to just watch the movie I wouldn't have been lost at all. I agree with the fact that you appreciate special effects and soundtracks as i do to, although I do love a cleverly spun sentence.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Tyler69skaterboy, I also enjoyed the movie more. The fact it was shorter also motivated me to concentrate and avoid the feeling of sleeping like yourself.
ReplyDeleteI feel exactly the same as you with regards to connection; I similarly find the movie more appealing as I can better associate with the characters. The characters seem more real in the movie as I can physically observe their facial expressions and actions. I agree it is much easier to see emotions and how characters react to one another words. I also noticed the way the women moved like snakes, which I felt better portrayed their sinister behavior. I’m so happy you feel the same way Tyler!
In response to what Josh Werner said I liked the movie more then I liked the book. In most cases the book is better than the movie but in this particular case I liked the movie more because it was almost the same thing and I didn’t feel like anything was lost or edited out that wasn’t crucial to the story. It is my understanding that many of my classmates have stated that they felt the movie did not do a good job of explaining the way the book did the details and that if they had not read the book it would have been hard to fallow but I think that’s not right.
ReplyDeleteI really liked this movie more then I liked the book. It seemed better to me because I didn’t have to do any reading and it was the same thing. I also felt like I could better grasp the characters emotions based off of the movie. The movie seemed to be a little more sad then the book did. I don’t think we should have even had to read the book because they practically the same thing. Although some of the smaller details were left out for the most part nothing important was missing. I feel like we did the exact same post as last week and I’m just repeating myself. But to be honest with you the movie wasn’t as good after we just read the book. I think that the book was good but the movie was better. The movie was also better because it took up way less time. Im happy that nobody fell asleep during the movie because it was really cool and at the same time I didn’t have to take another quiz and that’s always good, like the movie. After watching the movie I think hat Persepolis was cool and all but it made me want to move on to something different. Also the movie gave me a better insight into what I should right about my paper and that’s always good. So the movie was good and it was better then the book and that is all I have to say about that.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Muteb, I couldn't agree with you more! This whole time, I believed that the movie was going to be played by humans instead of animations. I had such big expectations from the movie thinking that it will much intense with real people playing each character in the book but at the same time, I was not disappointed. The cartoons surprisingly portrayed the characters well and I actually ended up liking the movie a whole lot than I expected, nevertheless, I still think that if the movie was illustrated with playing each role with humans, it would have been much better.
ReplyDeleteIn response to KaylaJohnson, I have to agree that there should have definitely been more background in the movie. A lot of important events that occurred in the book were left out of the movie. I feel like if I didn’t read the book before the movie I would have been unclear about certain scenes. I also agree that I’m usually someone that prefers movie over books and wouldn’t believe my friends when they would say the book is way better than the movie. But in this instance, the book felt more personal. The movie was still a good rendition, but it could have been better.
ReplyDeleteI respond to Blackwood and I agree that the movie is better. I am also a visual learner and I thought the movie was better at it even though the movie was basically a comic book. I thought the movie did cut out some parts of the story but they were more irrelevant parts of the story. The book and the movie were practically the same but I thought the movie was better in displaying the plot of the story. In all I liked the movie more than the book. I would recommend reading the book and watching the movie to get a full perspective of the story.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Stefanmahadeo91, I also found it interesting how the movie was portrayed as a flashback. I like how it began and ended with the same event, as a quote from the memoir. The movie definitely left out some very important scenes, which was disappointing. Certain notable issues were not even brought up, which could have made it more confusing if I had not read the book before. As I also discussed in my reflection of the movie, the subtitles were annoying, as ignorant as it might sound. In a movie where the actions and movements are so critical, it was distracting.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Blackwood, the movie was way better than the book; I learn best by seeing a visual. So adding voices to the characters really gave me a mental picture of what each character was really about. Another aspect of the movie that I like is you get to see the director’s interpretation of the book through his eyes. When you first read a book you have your own way of seeing the characters and your own way of the setting when you watch a movie that is based on a book, you get to see someone else’s interpretation.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Stefanmahadeo91, I agree with his compliment on the book being a flashback while the book was memoir. I definitely enjoyed this difference. While it does not change the story, or the meaning, it puts a new light on the story. This grasped my initial attention as I began to watch the movie. Before it started, I was not looking forward to watching the movie considering my belief that everything would be the same. Once this difference was presented right away, I started to think that maybe the movie would offer something a little different. This allowed me to find at least a little bit of enjoyment when being forced to watch the movie.
ReplyDelete