The Giver book is better then the movie because the book gives the reader a better opportunity to imagine more and to think deeper. Though the movie has more visuals, the book lets you imagine why this community was built and it allows you picture the ending you wanted it to be and not how the movie makers thought of it to be.
In the movie one of the first lines said, "From the ashes of the ruin. " which means there was a big, big war and this community was the last place to be built, or so they thought. The book just begins telling the story letting you wonder why this was built, or is this happening right now on some cliff in the middle of nowhere. I understand the reason the movie chose to add this, it was just the way they interpreted it. But it doesn't let you use your imagination they way books do.
The book's characters jobs were more to their forte and made more sense for their certain personalities. In the movie, the writers changed Feona's and Asher's jobs. Although I truly understand why this occurred, because they both help Jonas's journey through the jobs, was it truly necessary? It may have added drama but between the friends, I think the jobs shouldn't have gotten in the way of their friendship. In the book Asher was a wild, immature boy, but by getting the pilot job, it changed him to a responsible young man. Feona became a nurturer while in the book she was a carer of the old.
The book leaves you wondering. What happened? Where did Jonas go?Did he die, did he survive with Gabriel? The movie leaves you with a full understanding of what happened. He crossed the barrier and everyone got their memories back. They got the true meaning of what Jonas has been going through. The book just left it at the sound of ringing music for us to figure out what really happened. Though right when it ended I was mad at the book, soon after the more I thought about it, the more I embraced the fast ending.
Although many may think the movie was better, the book gives you a better understanding of what is going on. The book says how the people were feeling and what they were thinking which is harder to do in movies. It has more detail so it is easier to predict and understand what is going on and why. Yes, some just like movies better then books so of corse they will pick the movie over the book, but I don't love reading either and this book made me want to read.It forced my mind to think more and try to predict the whys and hows of the book which movies just can do. Books let you go at your own pace, so if something bad or sad happened you can take a break and think of what just happened unlike the movie. Mr. Coward did a great job stopping and going so we would think much more deeper into the conflict and we would discuss how to resolve that situation unlike movies.
Overall I believe the Giver book was better then the movie because the book lets you picture what is happening while the movie just shows it to you not letting any imagination appear in you brain. Although the movie may give you a better understanding of why this community was built, the reason I think the book didn't say why is to make you think why. For instance, I think the reason for making this community was because our world right now is in some trouble, with wars, climate change, and poverty. The beginners of the community thought to change their world to a safer and more reliable place. And lastly, in the book, it ends though abruptly, but elegantly. It provides enough information for you to think what happened in the end. I watched the Hunger Games before the Hunger Games book and for me, it ruined the book because I could not use my imagination so I pictured it the way the movie thought it should look like, but I think the book would be so much better if I hadn't seen the movie before.
Friday, April 29, 2016
In the short 4 paged story called Landscape of Memory basically just wrote about a lot of people with really good memories. I kind of understand why this applies to the book the Giver because being able to remember all of those memories is a dystopian life to live in.
Wednesday, April 27, 2016
All of the stories and poems that i'm reading are all realated to one another because of conformity and a dystopian future. I wish that some of these had at least a good ending but it really shows what can and might happen in the future from all the technology and if Donald Trump wins, (Hehe). Why is it in the Pedestrian, that it is so weird to go walking, what is so good about television, don't the get just awful headaches and are so brain dead the need a break?!
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
Jonas and Gabriel have been riding away from their community. Although the running away part is working, Jonas is trying to find enough food for everyone although it isn't really paying off. I think that soon they will find people who have run away too and the will work together to survive. Why is it so hard to food in the wilderness for them?
Thursday, April 21, 2016
Jonas is planning to escape the community to find Elsewhere. I think that this is a good idea although i really like the Giver so it will be hard to say goodbye to that character, but the Giver would soon be re-united with Rosemary. Why don't the Giver and Jonas start their own community?
Wednesday, April 20, 2016
Jonas watched a video with the Giver about his father "releasing" a child, but really killing it. I think that this world that they live in a evil and should be diminished from Jonas's help. Why don't they acutely release them to another community? Why kill them"