Twilight Zone

Movies vs. books is a debate that rages on for everything. Generally, stories tend to be better in their original book form. For me personally, I enjoyed reading Paper Towns more than I did watching the movie. However, some could argue that the Harry Potter movies are even better than the books (which, in my humble opinion, they are). In the case of An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge, whether you prefer the written version or the film adaptation really depends on the individual. Both versions take significant liberties with the story. The book spends more time building up the world, while the film cuts out the whole middle part of the story. There could be a number of reasons for this, but one possibility is that it didn’t fit with the vision of The Twilight Zone. Also, since the main character dies early on, the film might have felt it was pointless to waste time on his journey back home. Personally, I think the movie did a great job of illustrating the beginning of part three of the story. While they kept the foundation of the character’s actions, they changed the pace and emphasis of each scene. Overall, I prefer the film version of An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge, but that doesn’t mean it’s necessarily the superior version.

Leave a Reply