The Firm by John Grisham
The Firm with Tom Cruise
The book is about a lawyer, Mitch McDeere, who ends up working for a firm that is majorly corrupt. So is the movie, only, of course, different. As with any longish book that gets turned into a movie things are shortened and left out. The movie leaves off a lot of the beginning of the book when Mitch is getting to know the people and getting involved in the work and his attachment and involvement seem less because of it. It also shortens the time that the firm is talking to him before he takes the job and a few strange things happen that make you wonder why he took the job in the first place whereas in the book the warning signs were less obvious. Everybody’s character is slightly different in the book as well. For the most part it didn’t make too much difference to the plot but in the case of Avery, Mitch’s mentor, they made him a much more sympathetic character and it changed the whole feel of the relationship between him and Mitch and the way that it all played out. Of course, by that time they had changed so much other stuff that a few more things couldn’t have made any difference. There were little things like the fact that the FBI had to tell him things that he worked out for himself in the book and he worked things out for himself things that the FBI had to tell him in the book. And though there were more times in the movie that he was literally running from the bad guys the book was more suspenseful because everything was based on timing. But then there were bigger things too. Abby, Mitch’s wife, ended up playing a different part in the plan, the plan that Mitch comes up with is totally different, and most important, the ending was completely different as well. I thought at first the movie was trying to make the ending work out better for Mitch and Abby, have a slightly happier ending, but Mitch seems more bitter at the end of the movie than he did at the end of the book so I don’t think that was it. In fact, I think the book might have had a happier ending in the sense that the characters were happier. Once again I was left to wonder why the movie changed so much of the book. I understand that some things simply will not work in a movie and that there are time constraints and you want to make a movie more sensational and all of that but it isn’t like they are trying to hind the fact that the story has been done before. It is based on a book. It should be a story we have heard before. I was mad through the entire movie at the things that had been changed. Am I overreacting? Yes. I know I am. I don’t know why this particular book to movie conversion irritated me so much but it did. Maybe it’s because I felt like the story had potential as a movie but the actual movie didn’t cash in on any of it. Maybe I just don’t like Tom Cruise. Or that Gene Hackman (who I do like) had anything to do with this clunker. I don’t know. But watching this just confirmed for me that when I write my best selling novel I’m not going to let anyone turn it into a movie. I don’t want to see my carefully plotted novel ravaged and all my hard work thrown out the window. But since I will never write my novel I will just be indignant for those who have, since they don’t seem to be indignant themselves.
(In case there was any doubt, I'm on the side of the book here.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
Absolutely! I agree with every single thing that you said! The book was far more superior, the characters were believable, and it adhered to the whole law system better!
Nice blog anyways! :)
True! I was so irritated to see so many alterations to the original. Man.. they even altered the Beach scene.. it was so hot in the book ;)
there is no movie that can be compared with a book, as for me! http://bigessaywriter.com/blog/books-vs-movies-what-is-more-suspenseful will tell you the difference between books and movies!
When this movie came out in ‘90s a bunch of us from my office decided to go see it together after work. The two that had not read the book liked it, while the ten of us who had read the book (it was a best seller!) did not. So, I guess this means it was a good movie, but not as good as the book...
The screenplay was vastly superior to the novel. The novel makes Mitch out as some super intellectual giant who easily outwits his antagonists. Granted the novel is excellent UNTIL it’s loses pace. I have found several novels from various authors including Grisham who run out of steam. The novel should have had a 25% cut in length Vote screenplay on this one!
The movie did an injustice to the book.Good acting though,but the book was nerve wrecking.
Personally I like the movie much better than the book - and I actually did read the book first. I really enjoyed that Gene Hackman´s Avery Tolar was a much nicer and therefore far more tragic character. I also liked that only Mitch´s brother and Tammy start a new life in the Carribean. They will enjoy to drop out of the establishment, but not Mitch and Abby. When I read the book I really disliked many things about Grisham´s rather weak ending. I really do not think that having to spend the rest of your life on the run on a boat in the Carribian is the happy end which honest brain workers like Mitch and Abby deserved. This life would become empty and stale for them very quickly. The movie ending offered them to lead the life they always wanted. The only thing which I did not like all that much, was, that the Moroltos were let off the hook so easily - at least for the time being. But it does seem appropriate to uproot the lawyers who help the mob! And a relatively small crimes did bring finally down Al Capone after all.
I am really not a Tom-Cruise fan anymore for all the obvious reasons, but I did like his earlier work, and he is a fine Mitch, although I thought that the guy who played his brother was more attractive and more interesting. And Holly Hunter is always a pleasure! So is Ed Harris. The Firm is a very well cast movie with much more character developments than in the book.
Book is brilliant and have read it at leasta dozen times! Film is very,very disappointing and nothing like the novel.
I just revisited both the book and the movie. The movie was good, even with the changes in the plot - although I would have loved to have SEEN the scene where Ray goes over the wall, why mess with that? But the question I was left with at the end of the movie is this: what was the point of Abby and Tammy copying all the files in the Caymans and then shipping them off somewhere for safekeeping? Of course that was a major plot point in the book, but it doesn't relate to the way the movie spun out and just leaves a loose end. They did it all for nothing if all Mitch had to do was copy some invoices to give the FBI evidence of mail fraud.
I feel movie end was much better. Suspense and it really captured the mood of the firm
The book just seemed rushed at the end with too many things crammed in and the personalities changing. Just finished book on holiday in guilderton australia
I actually like the movie. I think it really captures the suspense of the firm which is unique. The avoided the suspense at end of book when they were being pursued. Many Hollywood films would have foxes on that instead. I think it’s a really good film and they avoided making it an action chase film
Agreed book ending was weak. Bouncing around hotels being chased felt really rushed and should have been more drawn out. Movie decided on an ending that was ironically less Hollywood. They decided to focus on the firm story and less action. A unique and interesting approach
Post a Comment