The Crucible essay.docx

 Cole VillarrealAP Language 1stKelley2-4-14The Crucible: From Play to FilmIn many instances, film adaptations of varying source material have differed from that on which they are based on, regardless of quality. Whereas films such as The Lightning Thief distance themselves’ from their source material, others expand on and add to the story their previous author has already told, like in the case of David Fincher’s Fight Club. In The Crucible film adaptation, directed by Nicholas Hytner from a screenplay by Arthur Miller himself, Hytner and Miller have worked together to adapt the play into a more fleshed out and cinematic experience. Hytner conveys his vision of The Crucible through the setting changes given to specific scenes of major importance, the characterization of the film’s main leads, John Proctor and Abigail Williams, and the addition of only previously mentioned scenes.With the medium of film, a director is afforded many advantages such as the ability to transition from an indoor to an outdoor scene with ease. In The Crucible film, several scenes were rewritten to be outside, allowing Hytner to make the people of Salem a reality rather than just an idea. Seeing their looks of disgust as well as the passion and sickening joy they display when viewing the hangings of their fellow citizens really gives the audience a feel for how unforgiving and horrifying the Salem witch trials really were. Whereas in the play all the drama was confined to the inside, the film introduces the audience to the antagonist of Salem itself.Hytner and Miller also chose to put an even larger focus on Abigail and Proctor in the film as the main characters of the story. In the play, other characters such as Hale and Parris are given more characterization that gives them more of a connection to the overall theme of a society in chaos. Here the story is more focused on Abigail, her obsession with John, and the lengths she’ll go to to be with him again. The subtleties in the film’s Abigail , such as her malicious smile, stray far from the juvenile and somewhat mean-girl esque vibe Abigail had in the play and illustrate her as a character that is more aware of just how sinister her actions are, while Proctor’s relatability as a “common man” gives the audience an avatar into the world being presented.By far the most dramatic of changes made for the film was the addition of several scenes not shown in the play. One such scene addition that adds drastically to the story is the ending scene in which we follow Proctor to his death. The film the audience must watch Proctor to the bitter end with a final lingering shot on the rope by which he has been hung. The addition of this scene really enforces and punctuates the cruelty and severity of the situation that Hytner and Miller both wanted to present to the audience. It’s absolutely devastating to watch and emphasizes the unfair and unfortunate punishments that these individuals had to undergo.In conclusion, Hytner’s film adaptation is one that appeals to a wider audience while still remaining completely faithful to its source material. This is more than likely due to the influence it had by the original playrite, but even still Hytner gives a great turn as director, keeping the main themes and plot points of the story intact while still offering up his own take on the narrative in a way that is fresh and engaging for a film audience. The changes he’s made give the story a more cinematic feel, yet don’t lose the horrors that Miller had originally intended to be front and center.Works CitedMiller, Arthur. The Crucible. London, England: Penguin, 1952. PrintThe Crucible. Dir. Nicolas Hytner. Perf. Daniel Day-Lewis, Winona Ryder, Paul Scofield. 20th Century Fox. Film ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download