Do you know how many human deaths are in each production, book, or movie, in “Of Mice and Men,” by John Steinbeck? This is one of the few things that does not matter when deciding which production of the story is better. Nevertheless, the book is far better than the movie, though having emotion and not gore, containing all scenes, and having a much better plot and literary structure.
Crook and Lennie’s conversation
In the story “Of Mice and Men,” the movie is overly gory, while the book is emotional. This is shown with the scene where Lennie fights with Curley. When Lennie lets go of Curley’s hand, in the book it is described as “looks to me like ever’ bone in his hand’ is bust,” which makes the reader take it to only what level of gore they know. This creates more emotions than gore. However, in the movie, blood is trickling down Curley’s somewhat shrunken hand, creating more gore than emotion. Others may point out that kids already should not be watching the movie, given the language it uses in the novella. For example, George yelling at the bus driver. Even though this may be true, many people are more sensitive to gore than to language, and creating emotion makes for a better story than creating gore.
Further, the movie takes out important scenes. One of the most major scenes, the discussion in Crook’s room, is mostly removed. In the book, Candy comes to join Crook and Lennie’s conversation, and the ensuing dialogue develops all of the characters involved, as well as the plot. In the movie, this scene is removed, hurting the plot and character development. Others may point out that the movie replaces such scenes with additional time developing the conflict with Curley’s wife. However, these scenes are not helpful because repeating the same scene of Lennie nervously interacting with Curley’s wife does not develop plot, characters, or conflict as strongly as the Crook/Candy/Lennie conversation.
Lastly, the book has a much better plot. The book has a true plot, where the characters develop. This is shown during the scene of shooting the dog. In the book, Candy is more resistant to Carlson shooting the dog, which develops Candy’s character. Additionally, in the book, the plot is always moving, and scenes that do not develop it, such as the horseshoe tournament or the second scene of the men working, are removed. This is proved by how major the complication of Lennie’s stupidity is.
In the movie, Lennie’s stupidity amounts to nothing more than a cause for him to kill Curley’s wife, while in the book, it helps the plot by offering a complication embedded in the rising action. On the contrary, the movie implants dramatic scenes, keeping the reader hooked-for example, there are additional scenes with the tension between Curley’s wife and Lennie or George, which keeps the movie exciting. This is disproved, however, with the fact that the movie has many parts where the plot is outright not a moving-for example, spending time where the farmworkers are traveling or working. This makes watching the movie often tedious while reading the book is not because of the ever-moving plot.
In summary, the book “Of Mice and Men” is better than the movie due to gore, scenes, and plot. Note the previous statements in this piece and shield yourself from the unnecessary gore of the movie. Read the book “Of Mice and Men”, by John Steinbeck before you ever watch the movie.