Unfortunately, the movie fell far short of our expectations. Joshua said at one point, "Why is this even called 'The Sign of the Beaver'? It doesn't have anything to do with it!" and it was true. So much of the book was taken out and other things were added that by the end we decided it wasn't a terrible movie if you didn't know what it was supposed to be about, but didn't even come close to how wonderful the actual story was.Dave remarked that very rarely are movies as good as the book because, "our imaginations are better" and that got us thinking. Alyson recently read the hugely popular Nicholas Sparks book, "Dear John" and was sorely disappointed in the movie-to the point of almost wanting to leave.
Can you think of any movies that were as good as the books? The Wizard of Oz comes to mind. Nick very quickly answered, "Lord of the Rings--particularly the Two Towers!" when I asked him.
Does it make a difference if you see the movie before you read the book?
...
*as an aside, yes, we will be making some breeches this week. Joshua is already sporting his "bear claw" necklace he bought in a kit with his birthday contest money, and his pirate shirt works perfectly. Now the question is, do we just buy mocassins, or do we tackle making them?
Too funny! As I read your post I was screaming inside "No! Don't ruin a delightful book for my Joshie!" Books are always better.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with Nick- I think the Lord of the Rings was a better movie, but only because they included the appendix story line in with the book (does that make sense). But on the whole I do have to agree that books are usually much much better.
ReplyDelete