Book to Moive Comparison: The Fault In Our Stars

The book The Fault In Our Stars by John Green is a contemporary book about two teenagers who meet at a cancer support group and fall in love.


The movie was directed by Josh Boone and was released on June 6, 2014 in the USA.

Here are my thoughts (Contains Spoilers):
Everyone who knows me knows how much I love John Green's book The Fault In Our Stars. So of course I had to see the movie. I went to see this movie the day it came out with my best friend. I think they did a fantastic job turning this book into a movie. They brought Hazel and Augustus to life on screen.
They used so many quotes and moments taken directly from the book to make the movie.
Obviously they couldn't include everything from the book in the movie, but the things that they left out didn't bother me. Hazel's friend, Kaitlyn, was left out of the movie completely, but she didn't play a huge role in the book so it didn't bother me. They left out the scene when Hazel and Augustus sell her old swing set. I liked this moment in the book, but I see why they cut it out because it really wasn't necessary to move the plot along. They left out Augustus's ex-girlfriend that looked like Hazel. I also feel like Augustus was sick for a longer period of time in the book than in the movie, but I also understand why they couldn't drag that out for too long in a movie.
I cried a lot when I read the book, especially the first time I read it. I did not cry while watching the movie. I thought I was going to but maybe because I knew what was going to happen it wasn't so bad? I did tear up a few times, but I feel like every time something sad would happen there would be a joke and you would feel happy again.

Book to Movie Comparison: Divergent

The book Divergent is a dystopian novel. In this world the city of Chicago is divided into factions and when you are 16 you take a test that helps you decide which faction to chose to live in for the rest of your life. When the main character Beatrice (Tris) Prior takes her test, she receives some interesting results and makes a surprising faction choice. 

Divergent

The movie Divergent came out in theaters in the United States on March 21, 2014 and was directed by Neil Burger. The main character, Tris, is played by Shailene Woodley.

Here are my thoughts (Contains Spoilers):

I was so excited to see this movie! I loved the book when I read it. You can find my book review here if you are interested. I gave the book 5 out of 5 stars and I give this move 4 out of 5 stars.

It was a good movie by itself, but when compared to the book there was so many differences that weren't really necessary.

There were a lot of things from the book that they did include. Tris's mom cutting her hair at the beginning, the zipline, but there was a lot that wasn't included or was changed.

The first thing that really bothered me was Shailene's hair. In the book, Tris's hair is blonde and Shailene's hair wasn't what I pictured at all. I know this is probably just me being picky, but her hair is brown and even with highlights it still looked brown and not blonde. It wouldn't have been difficult for her to dye her hair. Again, probably me being picky.

Second, what happened to visiting day? In the book Tris's mother comes to see her on visiting day, in the movie she just shows up. And she doesn't even tell Tris to go see her brother, Caleb. Tris just randomly decides to go see him. This is something that could have been fixed by adding one or two more sentences in when Tris and her mother are talking.

Edward's eye didn't get stabbed, they didn't show all of Tris's fears, and no dauntless cake? They left out Uriah and Al's crush on Tris. Tris wasn't the first person to fight in the book, she wasn't allowed to fight the first time because there were too many people. The ferris wheel scene was shorted, Tris wasn't practicing throwing knifes without a knife first. So many things didn't happen!

The worst thing they changed is the ending. Four was supposed to be on the computer helping control the simulation, but he was in one of the simulation chair, just sitting there, while the Erudite are controlling everything. Some parts of the second one aren't going to make sense now because they changed this. During capture the flag in the book they used paintball guns not these guns that feel like a real bullet hits you.

All of the changes were just so unnecessary.

Do I recommend seeing this movie? Yes, I think you should see it. Just don't expect it to be exactly like he book. Like I said before the movie by itself is great, but when compared to the book it just wasn't what I had hoped for. But, the book is always better than the movie anyway.

Book to Movie Comparison: Into The Wild

Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer

The book Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer follows the true story of Christopher McCandless's journey to Alaska to live alone in the wilderness, the people he meets along the way, and his eventual death.

The book was adapted into a movie directed by Sean Penn and released in 2007. Like the book, the film shows the triumphs and failures that Chris went through on his journey of life and death as he tried to survive alone in the wild. 

You can preview or watch the movie here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WydJ1w31OEI


Here are my thoughts: 
Firstly, I recommend reading the book before watching the movie.

The book tries to present the facts to the reader, even though Jon Krakauer admits that he is a bit bias, and give as much information as possible about Chris's story.

Emile Hirsch plays Christopher McCandless in the film. I think this was a good choice, he looked quite a bit like Chris did in the pictures I've seen and did a decent job of portraying Chris in the movie. I think that the casting for the movie was done very well.

For me, a lot of the movie seemed fake. I knew that the overall story was true, how Chris left his home to travel and eventually goes to Alaska, but I also knew that in a lot of the scenes we don't know exactly what Chris said to certain people or what he was thinking. Even if the people he talked to along his journey were interviewed, a memory of an event is not always 100% accurate. Because I knew that a lot of things in the movie were things that just could have happened, and didn't definitely happen, it made it not seem so real.

I feel like the movie was clearly made in a way that Chris's family approved of. In the book it is obvious that Chris struggled to deal with finding out that his parents had been lying to him.  The movie shows the family grieving over Chris leaving them, even showing Chris's father sitting in the middle of the street clearly in agony over the loss of his son. It also makes it seem like in the end Chris has forgiven his parents, which I believe is how his family wanted themselves to be depicted as.

There are several things in the movie that were clearly added to make it a better story. For example Chris's romance with Tracy who was played by Kristen Stewart. In the book it was only briefly mentioned that Tracy had a crush on Chris.

I feel that the movie depicted Chris as somewhat crazy for wanting to leave the comforts of society. For example, one scene shows Chris talking to an apple that he is eating and makes jokes about it. I think the book never said one way or another whether he was crazy or not. The book simply presented the facts to the reader so that people could form their own opinions about Chris. Jon Krakauer did give his own opinion, but I don't think it does much to influence the readers' opinion. I felt that the movie was trying to force an opinion onto the audience by depicted Chris as crazy.

Overall, I liked the book better than the movie. I think it was a decent adaptation of the book, however I wasn't thrilled with it. I rated the book 3 out of 5 stars on Goodreads and I think I would give the film a 3 out of 5 stars if I had to give it a rating. It wasn't bad, but it also wasn't the greatest movies ever and I didn't enjoy it as much as I had hoped I would.