Of Mice And Men Comparative Analysis

The 1992 movie Of Mice and Men, directed by Gary Sinise, contains several instances in which it diverges from John Steinbeck’s original, 1937 novella. The first difference is the way in which the two works convey their stories’ exposition. Steinbeck's novella begins when Lennie and George arrive at a clearing by the Salinas River. The characters remain a mystery until, through hearing the two men speak, it is revealed who they are, what they have done, and where they are headed. In contrast, Sinise’s interpretation begins with the incident in Weed and follows Lennie and George’s escape and journey to their new job in Soledad. There is less build up to the dramatic events which led them to their current situation. Another difference between Steinbeck’s and Sinise’s interpretations are their portrayals of Candy’s excitement and subsequent disappointment regarding the land he, George, and Lennie plan to purchase. The former constantly shows Candy “figuring” about the house and grounds while, in the latter, the only mention of Candy doing any such …show more content…
In the novella, George hesitates multiple times before finally killing Lennie. He then throws the gun away and, “...sat stiffly on the bank and looked at his right hand… ” Only Slim understands George’s reaction and, after George leaves with him, Carlson asks, “Now what the hell ya suppose is eatin' them two guys?” highlighting his ignorance, and emphasizing the story’s theme of isolation. In the movie, George shoots Lennie quickly, with little hesitation, and the story concludes with George sitting in a train car, reminiscing about Lennie. There is no tie-in to the theme of the story and little character resolution for George. Despite having major differences, both movie and book teach a bleak lesson about the predatory nature of society, even among its lowest, most isolated