Lord of the flies' media coursework essay.

The novel describes Jack Merridew, the leader of the choir, as "An ugly red head" and although the 1960's version is filmed in black and white, you can see with the shades that he is a red haired boy, and the actor playing him is rather unattractive. His dictatorial personality is accurate to the novel, making the character believable. In the 1990's film an American actor plays Jack's character, and although the personality yet again is more accurate, his appearance is again incorrect. The actor is fair-haired and this doesn't make the character particularly believable and as with the instance with Ralph, this could confuse the audience who have already read the novel, because the actor looked like he should be playing Ralph.

Overall the 1960's characters are more believable than the 1990's characters, mainly because the appearances where different to the description in the novel, but also the American accents make characters seem inaccurate because in the novel all the characters are English.

The scenes of Piggy's death in the two versions of the films are very different. In the 1960's version the 'Savages' are looking down on Piggy and Ralph when Roger releases a boulder. The death seemed accidental, the releasing of the rock was just used to scare Piggy and Ralph and make them aware that the once innocent boys meant business and they were not afraid to use brute force to get their own way, no matter what the consequences where.

They are all well spoken young boys and are all of the same standard, except Piggy; his dialect is a lot more common than the rest of the group, this results in most of Piggy's comments being dismissed. In the novel Piggy is of a lower class than every body else so this particular feature is very accurate to the novel. Whereas in the 1990's version all of the boys speak in the same American accent, all of the boys are members of a military group so they are all the same standard. This feature in the film makes it unbelievable because Piggy is lower class in the novel. The result of Piggy being the same class as the other boys makes him not looked down on by the other boys which then makes the reasons for killing him only because he is still sociable.

In the 1960's version, when the boys first meet on the island they are either wearing their smart school uniforms or, if they were part of the choir, their black choir robes. Their clothing at the time of Piggy's death is extremely drastic. The savage boys clothes had become ragged and they were basically naked with strips of their once existing school uniform or choir robes tied around their wastes to cover various parts.

Piggy and Ralph are still seen wearing their school uniforms, but obviously with the wear and tear of surviving on a deserted island for a long period of time the clothing is in a lot worse state than when they arrived. This symbolises the fact that Piggy and Ralph are the only sensible children remaining on the island and all civilised behaviour has gone. Another symbolic feature would be that the fact that Piggy dies means there are now no rules or restrictions on the island and anything could happen from now on. In the 1990's version all the boys enter the island wearing their military uniforms. As their time on the island increases, like the boys in the original film, their clothes deteriate, so by the time of Piggy's death, the boys have turned savage and as with the original film and the novel the only remains of their clothing are rags. To extend their savage look they paint their faces to make themselves look hideous. This portrays the fact the children are uncivilised and almost wild. Whereas Piggy and Ralph are still wearing their military uniforms. Now Piggy is not only an outcast because of his size, he is because he wishes to remain civil as well. Ralph is now also considered an outcast because, like Piggy, he will not surrender to becoming a savage child.

In the 1990's film they also used the symbolism of Piggy dieing to portray that civilisation has been abolished from the island.

The dialect in the two films are very different, they both represent what is acceptable in that date of age. The 1960's actors talk in their normal, posh English accents. This is their normal talking voice because the actors hired to perform in the film were all non professional. The film producers hired these actors to make the film seem as realistic as possible. They made the wrong decision though because the film lacks the ability to capture the audience's imagination. The 1990's version uses different dialect; example is of Jack swearing strongly. He uses the 'F' word, which although frowned upon, is a word widely used in vocabulary today but in the 1960's this sort of language would not have been accepted in a family film. Jack and the other characters swearing refers to the fact that they are no longer well behaved little boys but rebellious savages. This is also an indicator that civilisation and society have been abolished from the island because before landing on the island none of these boys would even think about using this language if adults were present.

The lighting in both films help to set the scene and the mood. In the 1960's version of the film they use very basic lighting because they are amateur film producers. However, although the lighting was very basic it is affective in its own way, because the light is used to cast shadows and light the innocent children's faces to make them look angelic. In the 1990's version the same affects are used but darker lighting is used on the savages faces to make them look sinister and rebellious.

As with every film the angels of which the cameras are situated are very important. In the 1960's version the angels used include a high angle shot used to make Piggy look vulnerable and weak. Long shots are used to portray the dangerous surrounding the boys inhabited in and to show that something bad is bound 2 happen. In the 1990's version, Piggy is already being looked down on when he is killed. They use a low angle shot to portray that Jack is more adequate than him.

The main difference between the two films is that they 1960's version is black and white and the newer 1990's version is filmed in colour.

The 1960's version uses its black and white filming to their advantage because the shades of black show how dark they place can really get and how bright and happy the inhabited island can be during day time hours. This could also make the audience realise that although the film is black and white the world isn't all black and white and a lot of problems do occur.

The 1990's version uses colour to indicate how lush the deserted island is, using rich blue for the sea and golden yellows for the sand. This shows how beautiful the place is. The range of colours also defines the objects better.

Overall I think the two films vary in style and storylines because the older 1960s version stays very true to the story line. I think this because it wasn't long after the novel had been released and the technology to adjust the storyline to more drastic dramatic scenes was limited. Whereas the later version uses it own ideas to extend the film to their own preferences. One of their preferences was to hire non-professional actors to play the parts of the stranded children. I think that their personal opinion would be that if they used these actors the film would seem more realistic, but in my view the use of these actors failed because they did not have the ability to capture the imagination of the audience. For instance when Piggy dies the facial expressions of the children are not as sympathetic and distraught as you would expect for children who have blatantly never experienced this type of trauma before. I think the lighting in the newer film was effective because it looked more professional and enhanced the emotions of the actors. The dialect was more realistic for they era that the film was made in, although the American accents failed them. I think both films were as imaginative as each other and they both had their superb and appalling parts.

Zoe Thorpe