Skip to main content

What are differences between Anna Sewell's Black Beauty and the movie?

Films always need much more visual and emotional drama to be appealing to viewers than books need to be appealing to readers. As such, while director Caroline Thompson's 1994 film is the most accurate adaptation of Anna Sewell's Black Beauty available, there are some differences.

In films, conflicts and love intrigues must be established early on. For this reason, in the film, Black Beauty falls in love with Ginger early in the story, but Ginger refuses to be friendly. In contrast, in the book, though Ginger is hostile towards Beauty upon his arrival because she accuses him of usurping her of ownership rights to the lose box, they warm up to each other fairly quickly. When first partnered with Ginger in the carriage, Beauty notes that Ginger "behaved very well," and he developed an admiration for her to the extent that he declares, "I never wish to have a better partner in double harness" (Ch. 5). And by the seventh chapter, Beauty and Ginger are friendly enough that she shares with him her life story. However, though they are friendly, they don't develop what can be considered a romance until they are both ruined by foolish drivers at Earlshall Park. Both are put in a meadow on Earlshall Park to regain their strength and greatly enjoy each other's company. Beauty describes what can be interpreted as spending romantic time with each other in the following:



We both felt in ourselves that we were not what we had been. However, that did not spoil the pleasure we had in each other's company; we did not gallop about as we once did, but we used to feed, and lie down together, and stand for hours under one of the shady lime-trees with our heads close to each other. (Ch.27)



To add more action, director Thompson created another difference by slightly changing the scene in which Beauty is being driven in a storm. In chapter 12, Beauty is out with Squire Gordon and John Manley on a business trip during a stormy day. By the end of the day, the storm is much worse. After being nearly struck and blocked by a falling branch, John turns the dog-cart around to take the other route across the bridge. But, Beauty refuses to cross the bridge because he senses it has been damaged by the storm. Soon enough, the man at the toll-gate informs them the bridge is broken in the middle. Prior to learning the bridge is broken, John jumps out of the dog-cart and goes to Beauty's head to see what is the matter. Upon learning the bridge is broken, John thanks God and praises Beauty then turns him around to pursue a different path. In contrast, in the film, John jumps out to try to pull Beauty across the bridge. Then, the bridge actually collapses, making John lose his footing. John saves himself by holding on to Beauty's bridle and is pulled to safety by Squire Gordon. In the book, John is much smarter than in the film because he knows to trust the instincts of a horse for sensing danger.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...
Post a Comment
Read more