My Sisters Keeper Book VS Movie

POST MAY CONTAIN SPOILER ALERTS


New York Times bestseller "My Sisters Keeper" was released in 2004 and made into a film in 2009. The point of view comes from the youngest sibling of the Fitzgerald family, Anna. Her older sister Kate is suffering from leukemia and needs one of Anna's kidneys to survive. Anna was genetically created to match Kate after her parents discovered she was sick at the age of three. After years of her body being used to help Kate's, Anna hires a lawyer to help to her achieve medical emancipation from her parents because she is under the age of 18. The book is a sad story about keeping one daughter alive while holding the whole family together. 

The movie and the book are both very good and make the reader/viewer feel as horrible as one can for a family going through so much. If I had seen the movie before reading the book I might feel different about the movie but I didn't so I don't. The movie completely demolishes the end of book and rewrites the whole ending. There are a few minor characters missing and some of the things in the movie are embellished but the end is really what I can not stomach. In the novel as tragic as it is, Anna passes away in a car accident and ultimately her kidney saves Kate's life. In the movie Kate takes her fate into her own hands and comes to the terms with the fact she will not get better and passes away. While I understand why the rewrite for the movie I feel like this is a tale that was meant to be tragic and the rewrite just puts a whole different spin on the entire story.


Watch the movie first then grab the book and READ IT!

Water for Elephants Book VS Film

POSTS MAY CONTAIN SPOILER ALERTS

'Water for Elephants' written by Canadian native Sara Gruen, was released as a movie in 2011 and brought in over 16 million dollars opening weekend. The story focuses on the life of a circus show during the depression and a young man named Jacob Jankowski. Jacob is veterinarian student who literally, runs away with the circus when his parents are in a car accident. There he meets the beautiful staring attraction Marlena and her husband August, the ringleader. August is horribly deranged and is cruel to the animals, especially an elephant named Rosie. Throughout the story men from the train are thrown off while moving because the circus owner can not afford to pay them. This speaks to the theme of the depression and the suffering some people went through at that time. In the end August is killed by the elephant during a stamped started by men that survived t being thrown from the train.

The movie is very similar to the book in many ways and in some ways even better. The beginning of the movie is not as long as tedious as it is written in the book. Jacob as an old man begins explaining his life to a man working the circus near his old age home. There were a few real differences in the movie then in the book and one is the character of Uncle Al. In the movie August is the main villain, but in the book there is also the circus owner Uncle Al who portrays greed and the lengths some men will go to to survive.

This was a seriously tough call because both are so well done in their own ways. The book just offers more to the relationship of Jacob and Marlena and the people involved in this circus. All in all I say you need to READ IT

Something Borrowed Book Vs Film

POST MAY CONTAIN SPOILER ALERT

'Something Borrowed' was written by Emily Giffin and released in 2004 as the first in a sequel based around two best friends living in New York. While the story is the compelling betrayal of ones oldest friend and how far is too far, the relationships just seemed to be too atrocious. While I did enjoy the book, the portrayal of Rachel’s character as a girl sleeping with her best friends fiancé and feeling justified in doing so, is just too much to swallow.

The movie took the important parts of the novel and then added a little bit more. Rachel and Dex’s (Darcy’s finance) affair is not portrayed to last as long in the movie as it does in the book. Also Rachel’s best friend Ethan is living in New York instead of England like the novel. The movie and the book are quite good though the endings are different. The movie ends with an accidental run-in between Darcy and Rachel leaving the watcher with the feeling that both are going to live happily ever after which of coarse does not need to happen in a book.

Both movie and book were enjoyable and worth your time but I would suggest you  SEE IT!

Girl With The Dragon Tattoo Book VS Film

POSTS MAY CONTAIN SPOILER ALERTS


The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo is the first of a trilogy of novels by author Stieg Larsson. The novel is based on an anti-social, bisexual, highly intelligent computer hacker named Lisbeth Salander, and Mikael Blomkvist a head strong journalist convicted of libel. The two are brought together while Blomkvist investigates the 40 year old  disappearance of Harriet Vanger . The book really contains everything needed to make a compelling story; mystery, murder, suspense, disgust, and revenge. The complicated mind and life of Salander would be enough for the trilogy itself but somehow Larsson makes every character an integral part of the story. Larsson makes literary references to hot button issues like violence against women, the corruption and greed of large corporations, and the cowardice of some people. The web of lies of the Vanger family have you gripping the next page before you've even finished the first sentence. 

The books were not even published until after Larsson's death in 2004 and became a major hit across the world. The movie was made in 2009 was well received in North America even with the film being completely in Swedish. With Noomi Rapace as Salander I really felt that Salander character was well portrayed and came across how I envisioned her in the book. While the movie was quite good in many aspects there is absolutely no way the complexity of the over four hundred pages in the novel were fit into 153 minute movie adequately. The villain Martin Vanger did not appear nearly enough in the film as he should have and the life and romance between Blomkvist and his editor Erika Berger need far more attention.


While the movie was a great watch and sure to be compelling when released in english in December of this year, I still say you READ IT

Flowers in the Attic Novel VS Film

POSTS MAY HAVE SPOILER ALERTS

 "Flowers in the Attic" written by V.C. Andrews was released in 1979, and was the first of the Dollanganger series. I was hooked from the first chapter and refused to put it down for even a second.
 A sinister tale of four children forced into hiding by their mother after they’re farther is killed in a car accident. The children are forced into the attic for years in order to punish their mother for marrying her half uncle. The children struggle to survive and ultimately the youngest boy Corey dies from arsenic poisoning. The book was banned in some places for its graphic scene of incest between the older brother and sister.

         The movie was released in the 1987 starring Louise Fletcher as the grandmother Olivia Foxworth, and Kristy Swanson as Cathy Dollanganger. While most of this cast falls short, Fletcher is brilliant in this film and really captures the cruelty of the grandmother. 
While the film is well shot and covers a lot of important information there are monumental differences. In the movie Chris and Cathy appear much older because they are only locked away for one year unlike the three and a half years in the novel. Cathy’s hair isn’t cut off but covered in tar, and they never meet their grandfather in the book. The biggest and most displeasing difference is the ending, which throws off the whole balance of the story. Their mother does not die at the end of book, and that is not the way the children escape.
All in all the movie was worth watching but you should READ IT