![]() ![]() Now I have to admit, I do get why they would make a choice like that, because that sense of stifling oppression from the church (which is a very present theme in the book) makes more sense (to a 2000s audience) if it’s set in the 50s than when it’s set in the 90s. The book is set in the 90s (I guess, because they talk about VHS tapes), but the movie is set in 1959. The thing that surprised me most was that in adapting the story to a movie, they placed the plot in an entirely different decade. Not just because it was a different medium, but the entire tone and setting had changed! But I had never read the book, so I thought it high time to do so and I was really, really surprised with how different it was from the movie. ![]() I’ve seen it and endless amount of times because it’s such a sweet and nice thing to watch when you’re feeling under the weather (which I am, quite often). This post may contain spoilers, for both the movie and the book! Be warned! (By the way, this is not really a review post, but more my rambling thoughts on the adaptation.)įirst of all, I need to mention that Chocolat is one of my favorite movies. ![]() Welcome to Film & Fiction, where we compare books to the movie adaptations even though we really shouldn’t! This time I’m going to talk about the book Chocolat by Joanne Harris (you can read my book review here) and the movie Chocolat (2000) directed by Lasse Hallström. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |