Some of the characters have been changed quite dramatically from novel to film. The most dramatic change was the character of Obadiah Hakeswill. In the film, he was completely different to what I had expected. The description in the novel portrays him in a very different way:
‘ …His skin was yellowish, a legacy of the fever islands. His hair was blond, going grey, and stretched over his scarred scalp, falling lank to the stretched, tensed, obscenely mutilated neck…’
The actor who plays Hakeswill (Pete postlethwaite) has tried to get into the role as best as he can and he has done quite well. He has the same mannerisms as hakeswill, e.g.: the uncontrollable twitch. The actor doesn’t look much like Hakeswill but it would be hard to find someone quite as disgusting and repulsive as the character in the novel!
Hakeswill is a very important character in the book because he is the one who causes all of the problems and all through the novel Sharpe keeps saying he is going to kill Hakeswill. I think Hakeswill has a bigger role in the film because he has presence when he is on screen.
The character of Sharpe is how I had imagined; this is probably because I had already seen the actor before watching the film. In the novel Sharpe is described as being a dark haired cockney. Instead, he is a light haired Englishman. I think the reason for the change is that the director wanted Sean Bean to act as Sharpe. I think Sean Bean was a wise decision because he could be the main reason some of the women watch Sharpe’s Company. It is a very male orientated book; women may not be interested in wars and fighting.
The next character is Teresa (Assumpta Serna). She is also completely different to what I had imagined. From reading the novel, the impression is given that Teresa is an extremely beautiful woman who is very independent and will stand up to anyone.
(Talking to Sharpe) ‘…Listen Englishman, I can keep a house, but not for a man who laughs at me…’
(Challenging Hakeswill when he is trying to rape her) ‘…The girl was nearly on to him. She had guts, for a Portuguese bitch, and he twisted to one side to avoid the lunge of the bayonet…’
In the film, Teresa relies on Sharpe more, she is more like a ‘normal woman’ and she waits for Sharpe to come and save her. This again makes Sharpes character look heroic. She also wears more womanly clothes in the film; this is done to appeal to males. The actress playing Teresa is also older than I had expected. I don’t think the character of Teresa was cast very well.
Teresa has a smaller part in the film than she does in the novel and most of her scenes were changed. This made the film worse than the novel.
Knowles was not included in the book; the reason for this was that the scriptwriter maybe didn’t think that it was necessary to employ an actor for only one or two scenes. Also, Knowles dies and this wasn’t shown in the film. This was probably because the film was rated PG and was shown before the 9pm watershed.
Another person who was not included was Leroy. He wasn’t included because his character was American and British people might not have wanted to see an America man fighting with the English and making out that he was also a hero.
The language in the novel and the language in the film were also very different. The Officers’ language was more formal in the novel. The language on screen has been made more up to date and modern. This is so people can understand the language and can watch the film instead of having to think what the character was saying, meanwhile losing track of the film.
There is no swearing in the film because it is a PG. This takes away the effectiveness because, if men were fighting and people were trying to rape their wives they would swear.
There is more use of Spanish and French in the film. Subtitles can be used whereas, in a book, you can’t have subtitles. This makes the film more effective because it is all about an army attacking the French and the Spanish to get to a place in Spain (Badajoz).
Music is used instead of description in some places. I don’t think this is very effective because you don’t usually realise the music is there unless it is very powerful. Sometimes the music was good because it related to what was going on. Other times the music didn’t seem to relate at all.
The makers of the film Sharpe’s Company would have encountered many problems during filming including characters, setting, audience and technicalities.
Characters: The casting would have been a problem, getting actors who fitted the description of characters in the book. I don’t think they overcame this very well with a few of the characters.
Setting: It would have been extremely expensive to construct sets like those described in the novel. The set would have to be in a believable location. They couldn’t have chosen Badajoz today because it is a modern town which looks nothing like it did in the war. Also, cast and crew couldn’t be moved very far because of expenses.
Audience: The audience also played a very big part in the filming. No sex, violence or swearing because of the PG rating and the watershed. Sean Bean was cast to attract women and the theme of fighting attracted men.
Technicalities: Because there were lots of soldiers in the novel and the budget couldn’t stretch to employ lots of actors, different camera angles could be used to create the illusion of more men. I don’t think this was very effective.
I have considered everything and my main reason for choosing the novel over the film is that the novel is more descriptive and exiting. Even though there was more waiting in the novel, the end result was better. The characters were completely different to what I had imagined, especially Hakeswill. None of the gory parts could be shown in the film, which made it less exiting. I think it would be worth including all of the swearing and the gory bits and making the film an 18, this would make the film as good as the novel, if not better.
By Hayley Anderson.
