Hit enter after type your search item

Death of a Salesman Comparisson


Death of a Salesperson Comparisson

Death of a Salesman After reading and enjoying Arthur Miller’s “Death of a Salesperson”, it was clear that there were many resemblances and differences between the film and the text. Many of the actors selected for roles in the motion picture seemed to have fit Miller’s portrayal of the characters. In between Willy sensation confused and lost to Linda’s brilliant issue for Willy they all were presented effectively. However, in the play, Willy Loman is portrayed as a guy of significant size while in the movie he is much smaller sized.

Although Dustin Hoffman portrays the character of Willy Loman well, he gets so enthralled in the heat of the scene that it sometimes makes the audience question if Miller intended for Willy to be so significant and psychological. Sometimes it’s overwhelming and even hard to understand what Hoffman is saying. A problem with transforming plays or books to movie is one can’t see pictures that support text. The mind must create its own pictures of what is being explained.

The representation of Linda Loman on screen was totally various than what I had envisioned her to be as while I was reading. I visualized her to be a little younger and a lot more run-down and tired from dealing with not just Willy and his lost life however to her two boys and the social concerns they have also. I saw her to be more distressed. As far as plot goes, the storyline was almost exactly the exact same in the movie and the play. Some scenes were interchanged, however not so much as to interfere with the advancement or structure of the story.

It also looks as though the director of the film deliberately made it resemble the movie was occurring on a phase, most likely to stay true to the truth that above all, Death of a Salesman is a play. I felt like the flashbacks were total and in the movie it aesthetically helped the audience to understand what was going on. In the text on the other hand, it was up to the reader to comprehend when they took place and who all belonged to them. I believe the motion picture adaption of this was done extremely well showing how Ben wasn’t “truly there” and it was simply Willy’s creativity when it came time for a flashback.

The authors of the movie script did an excellent job with keeping specific lines clear and understandable, keeping in mind that they had to more than likely modification little things here and there. Overall I found the majority of the film compared to the play a success. Between selecting actors who fit their parts as though they in fact were Willy Loman, Biff Loman, Bernard etc, to being area on with the plot for the a lot of part they were both very similar. Some failures in my viewpoint existed in the film when comparing to the text too.

When checking out the play I didn’t see Willy and Linda being so touchy feely, as in the kissing and hugging that went on. Likewise the lady that Willy cheats on Linda with is much more youthful than I envisioned. She is a lot more frustrating especially with her laughing than as I saw her to be in the play itself. Last but not least, towards completion, Biff seemed in my eyes much more psychological than I saw him to be through the text. I saw more anger and distress rather of appreciating willy and crying that happened in the film. In general, yes there were successes and failures when comparing the movie to the real play, however I need to state both were rather similar.

This div height required for enabling the sticky sidebar