A book about the Russian Revolutionary war, Animal Farm is about animals who rebel against the humans, and believe they will be able to run the farm,both versions of Animal Farm have the same storyline.The movie gives a good visual representation of Animal Farm but, it doesn't do a good job overall of summing up the book. The book goes into more detail, and the reader can fully grasp what’s going on, but on contrary there are some things that were better in the movie than the book. Lack of detail in a book can cause the reader to lose interest and make it dull. The same thing goes for a movie. Movies can also lose details that are important that tie the overall story together. Important parts that were left out or changed some of the time made
…show more content…
In the book it was written in 3rd person limited, but the author had a technique to it. “He weaves in and out of the creatures' heads, cluing us into things like Clover's distress about the executions.
One thing to notice. The narrator spends a lot of time being aggressively neutral with the passive voice. Take this instance: It was noticed that they were especially liable to break into "Four legs good, two legs bad" at crucial moments in Snowball's speeches.But the cool thing about this technique is that the narrator gives the animals' perspective, showing that they notice things but don't really get it. They can't put it together.”
In the book, the point of view used was great, because we got to know the thoughts of [Jessie] and how she felt, as if the watcher was there with her. As well it went and told from another view point, third person limited omniscient, that was keeping up with what Jones was doing. Then, the watcher can personally relate to the animals and how they are feeling as well as knowing what Jones was …show more content…
It's the most important part of a story, what especially makes the book good is the details of the plot. The details of the movie weren't really that good compared to the book. The book really tied everything together and the reader could fully grasp what was going on, or just make it more interesting. For example, Squealers speeches, that was one of the uses of propaganda used in the book, basically during the Russian Revolutionary War, he was a newspaper. During then that's how most people got the news, and everything they read in it had to be true, so they believed. Just like Squealer, everyone believed what he
In the book it was written in 3rd person limited, but the author had a technique to it. “He weaves in and out of the creatures' heads, cluing us into things like Clover's distress about the executions.
One thing to notice. The narrator spends a lot of time being aggressively neutral with the passive voice. Take this instance: It was noticed that they were especially liable to break into "Four legs good, two legs bad" at crucial moments in Snowball's speeches.But the cool thing about this technique is that the narrator gives the animals' perspective, showing that they notice things but don't really get it. They can't put it together.”
In the book, the point of view used was great, because we got to know the thoughts of [Jessie] and how she felt, as if the watcher was there with her. As well it went and told from another view point, third person limited omniscient, that was keeping up with what Jones was doing. Then, the watcher can personally relate to the animals and how they are feeling as well as knowing what Jones was …show more content…
It's the most important part of a story, what especially makes the book good is the details of the plot. The details of the movie weren't really that good compared to the book. The book really tied everything together and the reader could fully grasp what was going on, or just make it more interesting. For example, Squealers speeches, that was one of the uses of propaganda used in the book, basically during the Russian Revolutionary War, he was a newspaper. During then that's how most people got the news, and everything they read in it had to be true, so they believed. Just like Squealer, everyone believed what he