We all know that it is a common occurrence for movies and books to not line up and the same is true for the Grapes of Wrath. Here are some of the biggest differences I noticed.
In the book we see more into the journey and destination of California, the movie we sort of fly through the journey and bam your there! We miss a lot of the intercalary chapters in the movie, instead of encompassing all of the migrant workers we really only see the Joads and their few brushes with other travelers. The anonymous family who was sold bread and bought the candy in the book, it was the Joads in the movie. All of the bartering and trading for money and the sleazy car salesmen were all lost in the movie. Also the turtle was completely absent, we didn’t see much of anything but the Joads, which I feel took a lot away from the story.
The movie flipped the peach ranch and the government camp around; the book had them leave the camp to go the ranch. Movie was vice a versa, I guess they wanted it to end on a more positive note. The movie chopped off the whole cotton working, and Tom left while they were at the government camp. Rose of Sharon doesn’t lose her baby but we do see her become ill as they are leaving the government camp. I felt that really represented how the immigrant workers were being treated.
Overall I guess the movie did a pretty decent job representing the story but I feel they took some of the most emotional parts and either got rid of them or downplayed them. I really liked the book, Steinbeck is one of my favorite authors and I hope to read more of him, but maybe not watch the movies.
I agree with your observations. To me, the movie absolutely "glazed over" the bitter realities of the Joad family. When I was reading the book, I was broken-hearted by the fact that so many were willing to take advantage of the down-and-out (sleazy car salesman, etc.). I think Steinbeck meant us to felt outrage, or shame. The movie seemed to step carefully so that no one would feel bad about society. What do you think?
ReplyDelete