Short Story Adaptation

PLOT

First of all, the short story I would like to change into a movie would be The Lottery. Even though this story horrified me, the message of blind acceptance scared me- a lot; I think that this story is a perfect example which would quickly cause an audience to understand this horror. In the story, the plot is just a snippet of what occurs on the day of the lottery. The exposition explains the lottery, the rising action is the choosing of the names, the climax is Mrs. Hutchinson being chosen for the stoning, and the falling action is the stoning. In the movie, I personally think that the story would have to be amplified a bit. I think it would aid the storyline and allow the audience a better view into the village if there were more to the story. For instance, I think the movie version would have to have the after effects of Mrs. Hutchinson's stoning. However, the continuation of the story would change the meaning; the original short story gives no insight to the future of Mrs. Hutchinson or the ritual, so obviously this would effect the meaning of the work because of newly created endings and details.

Point Of View

In the short story, the point of view is third person. Not only is this point of view third person, but the voice is reflected as detached, objective, and uncaring. There is no emotion, (except in dialogue) and the narrator simply states it as it is. In the movie version, I would create more dialogue between the characters. Obviously, much of the narration would have to be cut out because I am under the impression that the majority of people prefer to watch movies without the overriding, annoying, monotonous voice of some random man. I think that there would have to be a little of this in the movie, but the majority would be through dialogue. Using more dialogue would then cause the movie to have more emotion, because actors add emotion and actions to, well, act. This might cause the  meaning to become somewhat less horrifying, but I believe the basic meaning would remain strong.

Characterization

There are two types of characterization : direct and indirect. The original short story uses indirect characterization. The characters are described through dialogue, actions, interactions with other people, and appearances. I believe that this would remain the same throughout the movie version as well. I don't find is particularly appealing to listen to a narrator directly say things about each character. It is important the the audience learn for themselves the differing characteristics about each individual and their complexities. Since the characterization of the individuals would not be changing from the short story to the movie, I don't see the meaning changing much. The only thing I could maybe for-see would be the dialogue between characters becoming more important, their actions, and their appearances because their would be less involving the narrator's description.

Setting

In the short story, there is much said about the setting as a way to introduce the story. We know the action occurs between 10 a.m. and noon on June 27, a sunny day, in a New England village; however, the setting never leaves this location. Additionally, the time of this story happens very quickly. Because of the lack of scenery changes and time, this might be a difficult obstacle to overcome to make this story into a film. I think though, that if the plot expands upon the day's events, then there wouldn't be as much of a problem of setting and timing. The scenes could change from Mr. Summers' coal mine and his morning activities to prepare, include the lottery, and then continue onto after the stoning. This would allow the movie to change scenery and time, keeping the audience involved. Of course, changing the scenery does change the story's meaning because of the introduction of new material, especially since my movie would adapt the plot somewhat too. However, the core meaning of the story- the horror in blindly accepting and following traditions- would remain.

Theme

I believe that the themes found in the short story are too important. The themes I picked up on were: the reluctance of people to reject outdated traditions and following the crowd can have disastrous consequences. I am sure that there are several more, but these are the two I find to be the most important. In creating a movie from "The Lottery," I would attempt to keep these important messages as close to the original meaning as possible. As I have talked about altering different things (i.e. point of view, plot, setting), I do not think that I have remarked upon any changes that would diminish these themes. I think that the changes I suggested are pertinent to hold the attention span of an audience long enough to receive the message. I know that my version of the movie would keep the main storyline the same, thus causing the themes to remain the same as well. I think that this story is an excellent illustration of these essential life lessons, and I would not want to be the one responsible for making unnecessary, drastic changes.

Stand By Me

take a second to listen.
and trust me, you're going to want to watch it :

PLOT

To me, the plot of Stand By Me was pretty consistent with the going-ons in the short story, The Body. Of course there were a few added scenes (i.e. mailbox baseball with Ace's gang) and a few scenes deleted (i.e. the omission of Gordie's story Stud City), but I think overall they didn't change the story. However, I noticed one difference; one difference I believed to be a pretty big change to King's original work. The relationship between Denny and Gordie was very different. In the book, Gordie reflects upon Denny saying, "In a family situation like that, you're supposed to either hate the older brother or idolize him hopelessly-at least that's what they teach you in college psychology. Bull, right? But so far as I can tell, I didn't feel either way about Dennis" (pg 311). The book-Gordie felt like he didn't have a relationship with Denny-he cried at the funeral more for his parents than for his dead brother. The movie-Gordie was portrayed as having a really close, special bond with Denny.  There were flashback scenes and moments in the movie where Gordie thought about Denny & became very saddened; this never occurred in the book. Overall, I believe that the movie sticks to the plot pretty well, besides the Denny/Gordie relationship and the ending details (such as Vern and Teddy living, the lack of the boys getting beat up by Ace, and Ace's character).

POINT OF VIEW

In the movie and the story, there is definitely a difference of point of view. In the story, the point of view is purely Gordie's; it is entirely in first person, and we hear the story through his eyes. We know it is through his eyes by the first word on page 293 "we." Of course, this had to be altered for the movie. It would be highly boring to simply hear grown-up Gordie narrating the action and the events throughout the entire movie with a few snippets of dialogue scattered throughout. I think the movie's screenwriter and director did a great job compromising with the original story by using bits of the grown-up Gordie narrating with the actual dialogue. There are several moments throughout the movie where Gordie does narrate and fill the audience in on a few things that we are unaware of with the third-person limited point of view. I also thought the flashbacks of Denny and Gordie were a smart way to fill the audience in on Denny's personality, and the relationship between the two. In my opinion, changing the point of view was completely necessary to create an interesting movie. I believe that it made the movie stronger to show the action as older Gordie's memory of the time in his childhood by allowing him a few narrations throughout the story.

CHARACTERIZATION:

Once again, I thought the movie stayed pretty close to the original story. This was especially true regarding characterization; I still got the same sense of character and personality from the movie as I did from the story. I thought the train scene in the movie best showed the four boys' character. It showed me that Teddy was still "the dumbest guy [the boys] hung around with...and he was crazy" (pg 296); Vern was still the type of scared boy who always "ran first" (pg 418); Chris was still "the best out of [them] at making peace" (pg 435); Gordie was still "the writer" (pg 496), the storyteller of the group. I also thought that most the other characters, like Ace and his gang, the parents, the teacher who stole Chris' lunch money, stayed the same character wise. The only person whose character really differed was the grocer, George. In the story, he was a grump and a man who tried to "jap little kids" (pg 344). In the movie, he simply reflects on the type of individual Denny was, as he does in the movie, but there is no argument or swindling. I am uncertain as to why the movie would need to alter this character. Overall, I think the movie did a good job of staying true to character.

**warning: expletives**

SETTING

The setting in the movie was just how I had imagined it in my mind. The treehouse, the town, and the journey into the woods were exactly how I thought they would be. I thought the movie did a perfect job of capturing the world in the 1959 and reflecting that onto the screen. However, there was one big difference I caught. It was simply something the grown-up Gordie said, rather then something portrayed on the screen. In the movie, Castle Rock was supposed to be in the state of Oregon. In the story, Castle Rock is in "southwestern Maine" (pg 300). I really wanted to understand why the movie would be switched to this location because I didn't understand why there would be a need for the change. I looked it up online, and this website says that "Stephen King explained it in a rare interview...the screenwriter mistook the city of Portland as being in Oregon, but King meant it to be Portland, Maine. Hence the mistakes withe the states." I don't know about the reliability of this, since I could not find the interview with King. However, I found this to be a plausible reasoning. In searching for the reasoning I found another really cool website that reveals a lot about the setting of the movie, and compares it to the real Oregon town Brownsville (the town where the movie was set) today. Check It Out! Overall, I thought the movie setting added to the story. 

THEME

To me, the movie carried on the same theme about friendship as the story did. However, in the movie, Gordie didn't seem to be so torn up about friendship. In my last blog, I thought that book-Gordie contradicted himself regarding friendship. I thought this because at one point he states, "I never had any friends like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, did you?" (pg 341), and then he later says, "Friends come in and out of our life like busboys in a restaurant, did you ever notice that?" (pg 432). Yet, I got a different vibe from the movie. The grown-up Gordie reflects upon his friends and his relationships with them as special gifts and special moments in his life. His portrayal of his friendships is much more poignant than anything. I think moments, such as the boys singing songs on the journey, show the closeness of the friendships reflected in the movie. In the movie, the boys were all very, very close; this was easy to tell because of their easygoing attitudes, their joking interactions, and their unguarded behavior. For me, the moment I realized the importance of these friendships to grown-up Gordie was when his son and son's friend interrupted his writing at the end. Gordie's reaction to this showed me that he realizes how special young friendships are; through the window at the end, the focus on his son and son's friend clarify Gordie's beliefs about friendship. Although I thought that the movie slightly altered King's original theme of friendship to make it more emotionally touching, I believe that the movie's theme was pretty on track with the story's as well. 

Popular Mechanics

Question 4

In the short story "Popular Mechanics," the plot is depicts a fighting couple that turns to fight about 'the' baby. (As a side note, I thought it showed a lot about the characterization of the couple by the fact that the baby was nameless; additionally, it was called "the" baby, not their, ours, etc.) We don't know why this couple is splitting up; there are no clues as to the man's decision "push clothes into a suitcase when she came to the door." It doesn't matter that we do not know the reason for the split because it is irrelevant to the story. Whether this was the result of a fight about money, cheating, or work, the point of the story remains. The two have gotten into a pretty intense fight regardless of the reason. The point of the story is that their fighting has began to negatively impact the child who they believe they are trying to save. Emotions are high; the woman is crying and yelling and throwing names at the man. The theme of the story would not differ if we were to be made aware of the reasons behind the argument.