Is the film 'Of Mice and Men' a successful presentation of the novel?

Samantha Whittaker

Is the film ‘Of Mice and Men’ a successful presentation of the novel?

The film ‘Of Mice and Men’ is an adaptation of the novel by John Steinbeck, which carries the same name. The film was made, 50 years after the book was first published, in 1987.

Starring roles were given to John Malkovich playing the part of Lennie Small, Sherilyn Fenn as Curley’s wife and Gary Sinise who played George Milton. Not only did Sinisie star in the film, but he also directed and co-produced it.

‘Of Mice and Men’ was filmed on location in California as the immense detail in the book could only be justified on a true ranch. The summer days and surroundings could not have been recreated in a studio. Also, this was more practical than building sets that would have been less realistic.

As Lennie Small is an interesting complex character with learning disabilities, this would make playing his part extremely difficult to play. As John Malkovich takes on this role superbly, keeping it as true as you can get to the book, it makes the character of Lennie Small my favourite in the film.

As for the character of Lennie, there are no boundaries to his characteristics and the range of the features he has. Despite his learning disability he has a great sense of humour and the initiative to create a good joke. Saying this, Lennie is more dependent on George and is often mimicking him. There are many occasions were George will make a statement and Lennie will repeat the idea of what he has said, although not always using the same words. He is childlike and with this innocent, he doesn’t mean any harm nor does he know any better. He trusts everyone and doesn’t prejudge people just like a child does.

Malkovichs ability to step into this role is remarkable and he obviously did a lot of research to develop his character to reach the high standard that he achieved. There are numerous aspects of the character that only Malkovich could execute to such a standard.

To begin with, his stature is exact to that of how I feel Lennie’s is described in the book. He is tall, with broad shoulders, and seems to be an intimidating strong man, yet at heart, he is a gentle giant. This makes him visually perfect for the role and adds to his characteristic advantages.

Another factor that adds to his visible contribution to the character are his facial features. His balding head is almost like a baby’s reverting back to how childlike Lennie is. The faces that Malkovich brings into play in the film are outstanding. He sincerely makes you believe that he has learning disabilities himself, as his facial expressions are so believable. The face that sticks out the most in my mind is when Malkovich wrinkles his brow and sort of pouts with confusion or ignorance, on Lennies behalf. It really does reflect that of how someone, who was similarly disabled, would look.

The voice that Malkovich uses for Lennie and the expression in his speech also makes you believe that Malkovich himself has disabilities. His speech is slow and he often stumbles over words especially if he is exclaiming something passionately. His vocabulary is restricted and most of the words he uses that aren’t conventional, like swear words, he mimics off George and other ranch workers.

Malkovichs mannerisms that he uses for Lennie are just like those described in the novel. He moves slowly and quietly but often makes clumsy moves and accentuates how Lennie doesn’t seem to know his own strength.

The character I feel, who had a lot of potential to be outstanding when adapting to film but was severely disappointing, was Curley’s wife.

There is no fault with the actor’s ability or physical appearance that plays the role, except for the minor detail that she is a brunette and Curley’s wife is blonde in the book. The problem lies with ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

The character I feel, who had a lot of potential to be outstanding when adapting to film but was severely disappointing, was Curley’s wife.

In the book, Curley’s wife comes across as being very vindictive person. She snaps at people without reason and makes threats to get people in trouble as she has the power being the boss’s daughter in law. She dresses in red, signifying the danger that lies around her, and wears flattering clothes, to the point of being slightly risqué. She is many a time referred to as being a “tart” by the men on the ranch, just because she like to converse with the men on the ranch, and after all there is no women for her to talk to. Her behaviour makes her hated by characters in the book and the reader also.

In the film she dresses more suitably and is more likable. You are made to feel sorry for her, as she is never seen doing anything to provoke the treatment she receives the other ranch workers. She doesn’t snap at people and seems to be timid.

The Curley’s wife in the film disappoints me, because she is dreadfully untrue to the book.

Another character I feel wasn’t represented well, was Crooks. In the book he is an unfortunate man, being the only “nigger” amongst a ranch full of white folk.

When the book was set, racism was common as was the persecution and slavery of black people, therefore there are many references towards how badly Crooks was treated, and how this had affected his physical appearance.

Crooks’ back is severely crooked due to a horse kicking him. For this, he received little money off the boss and had to maintain his job as a stable buck. His face, as it says in the book, is wrinkled with pain; probably due to the amount of times he has winced with pain due to his back or being physically abused by other ranch workers. His hair is long and covers this aged sorry sight, caused by unjust behaviour and tormenting.

The film takes the immense sympathy away from Crooks, by altering his appearance. His hair is short to start off with, and the face it should be covering is young and smooth with not a line of age, never mind pain, to be seen. His lame walk is almost humorous, looking like half of him is doing an impression of a chip by dragging his knuckles along the floor.

Yet again, because I feel the character wasn’t true to the book, I dislike them. If I had only seen the film, I wouldn’t have any critical problems with Curley’s wife or Crooks as, as they stand in the film, they are both excellent characters, but as I have read the book and felt contradicting feelings for both characters, then I have room to find fault.

There are quite a few scenes missed out of the film that were in the book, one of which is quite important character builder.

The scene in question is when all the men on the ranch, bar Lennie, Candy and Crooks, have gone out on the town for a night. Crooks, as usual, is left in his quarters next to the stables, where he minds his own business. This night he gets some visitors. In the film, Crook’s only has one visitor, being Lennie. The book however, has two other people join Crooks and Lennie, these two being Candy and Curley’s Wife.

There are two points that, by excluding these characters, the film doesn’t draw upon.

Firstly, as Candy doesn’t come into the scene, Crooks never finds out that Lennie’s babblings about the rabbits and the ranch are true, therefore doesn’t get in on the ‘dream.’ This is probably because by adding Crooks into the dream, it would make it harder to include it later in the film and to tie up any loose ends caused by Crook’s involvement.

The second point that is overlooked is Curley’s wife’s racial and malicious verbal attack on Crooks. In the book, Crooks gets a tad overconfident by having so many, Candy and Lennie, people around him being friendly. He totally forgets his ‘place’ on the ranch and answers back to Curley’s wife. She lashes out at him saying she’ll use her position; firstly as a woman, secondly as she is the boss’s daughter in law and thirdly as he is a “nigger”, to get him lynched. This scene was probably left out as, nowadays, the dialogue and racial threats are not politically correct in any way shape or form. Because this scene is cut, it differs the way Curley’s wife is perceived in the film and book, we don’t see how clever she is and how she uses her knowledge, power and position to be malicious.

In the book, there is a quite surreal scene towards the end, when Lennie is by himself in the brush. He gets agitated with himself over what he has done and all of a sudden, a short, plump lady appears, his Aunt Clara. She starts speaking to him in Lennie’s voice. Then after she is finished disappears. Then, a giant rabbit scuttles out of Lennie’s head and starts shouting at him. Unfortunately, this is never visually seen as it is left out of the film. It would have been a funny scene and with it being right near the end, would have spoilt the mood; therefore, it was left out.

Another scene left out so not to detract the mood, was when Lennie has his dead puppy in his arms after he has killed Curley’s wife, and he has the idea of throwing the pup away so it “wouldn’t look so bad.” The last two scenes would have caused undue laughter in the middle of two important and emotion parts of the film, which would have lessened the viewer’s emotions.

Along with missing out scenes, a fair number of scenes were added.

For example, in the film there is a scene when Lennie enters the bunkhouse with the bib of his dungarees puffed up and him cradling it. As Lennie had tried to sneak his pup into the bunkhouse before, Lennies suspicious behaviour hints to George that he is trying to do it again. After George scalds Lennie for his attempt to sneak the pup in again, Lennie lies on the bed and slaps the bib of his dungarees, flattening it, and finishing the joke. An amusing practical joke, obviously thought up purely by Lennie showing he does have an intelligent and a funny side.

Another scene that is added, that affects how you feel for Curley’s wife, is when she tells Lennie and George about how Curley has broken her four records. The scene works as throughout the film, we are made to feel sorry for Curley’s wife because of how she is treated by everyone, including her husband. It is like Curley’s wife in the book and Curley’s wife in the film are two totally different people.

A short scene that is added to give a greater insight into Lennie is, when he goes and talks to Crooks, they both sit on Crook’s bed and Lennie, like a child would, touches Crook’s hair as it is different to his own. This is another example of how Lennie’s mentality is similar to that of a child’s whilst adding a bit of humour into the film. It also illustrates how lonely crooks must be as it enables him to experience some physical contact.

There are many scenes in the film that I like, some of which have been adapted from the book but then there are others that have been added which I feel are very effective.

A scene that is from the book and is, in my eyes, the best scene in the film, is the killing of Curley’s wife. The main part of the scene starts when Lennie starts to stroke Curley’s wife’s hair. The mood is tranquil and almost like that of a romantic scene. Both Lennie and Curley’s wife are happy. Lennie gets over excited and starts to stroke Curley’s wife’s hair harder, much to her discomfort and dislike. Up to this point, they had been directed to be sitting close and face-to-face, knelt on the hay. Lennie had been stroking Curley’s wife’s hair with both hands. The sound of birds can be heard in the background adding to the calm atmosphere. Then as Curley’s wife gets agitated, the mood shifts, as does the background noise, the music hints towards a negative moment, as it is low and fierce. She gets loud, ordering Lennie to get of her hair. Lennie panics, he covers her mouth with his hand in an attempt to shut her up. They are now stood up; Lennie is behind Curley’s wife with his hand over her mouth. She struggles whilst trying to scream, her attempts muffled by Lennie’s giant hands. Lennie jolts her about, panicking, trying to get her to shut up. The scene is in full swing and moving fast. Curley’s wife doesn’t give in shouting and squirming, so Lennie gets even more frustrated with her and with one final jolt of discipline, he accidentally breaks her neck. The scene slows down. The mood is again peaceful, the birds return, disturbed only by Lennie’s cries towards what he has done. The changes in the speed of the scene and the mood make it indeed dramatic and memorable.

Right at the end of the film, George is recollecting his memories whilst on a train. This scene has been added to the film, but is successful in fitting in and adds to the sadness caused by the film ending. It is only about a minute long but effective. It is of Lennie and George working away on the ranch. They both throw a bag of grain on a cart, turn around and walk away, as they walk off, Lennie drops slightly behind George and holds on to his shirt. The music is soft and serene, relating back to how happy and peaceful they were together. This moves the audience even more after the ending, reminding them of how George and Lennie once were.

Being filmed on location, the scenery in the film is faultless. It is precisely as the book dictates. This makes watching the film easy as everything is clear and there is no trying to picture anything in your head as it is all there to be seen.

Not only does the fact it was filmed on location that makes it seem like you’re stepping back in time, but also the costumes add to the authenticity of the film. The workers all wear hardwearing denim, as this was the time of Levis and jeans. The boss and his son wear less practical clothes and high-heeled boots with spurs, as they didn’t do much taxing work on the ranch only ride around on their horses, keeping an eye on everything.

The music plays a vital part in setting the mood of many scenes. It ranges from soft piano and violin music to fierce deep music that fills you with anticipation for an upcoming dreadful moment. The use of violins for music is probably because during this time, if anyone could play and instrument on a ranch, it would be a violin, as they are small and light to carry from place to place.

The end of the film is almost heartbreaking. Lennie and George are alone again, as they were at the beginning, in the brush talking about their dream. The last thing that is expected, that I least expected, was that George was going to shoot Lennie. The shock of this and the fact George is alone and Lennie dead, provokes sadness. Then, to provoke this emotion even more, the little added scene of them working together at the end almost makes you choke with emotion

The film, on a whole, is a very emotional film. Whether it is the happiness caused by when the dream becomes reality; as this is what they have always wanted and deserve. Sadness, when Lennie kills his puppy; as he really did have affection towards it and even though disaster was imminent it was sad. Amusement- when Lennie plays his practical joke; as for a man with learning difficulties it was a funny joke to think of on his own. Anger- when Curley lashes out at Lennie; as Lennie has done nothing to provoke him.

In summing up, the film, even though it misses out some scenes, in my eyes, is a successful presentation of the book. The emotions the film provokes at certain moments are the same to those in the film.

The film gets the story across well and helps to put a picture to everything in the book especially the appearance of characters and their mannerisms and facial expressions.

On its on, without the knowledge of the content of the book, the film is excellent and without fault, although knowing how it has been changed, adjusted and added to, causes some minor disappointments.

If the film were to be remade, the only suggestion I would have would be to cast Curley’s wife and Crooks differently and also to amend Curley’s Wife’s wardrobe so it is truer to the book.

Saying this, I did enjoy the film as much as I enjoyed reading the book.