How similar to the book? - The Cider House Rules (2000) Discussion

[–] mememedbest 18 years ago

all there is in the movie is in the book but it's certainly not the other way round! same middle for sure and ending not that far off but the beginning is a bit different. chunks the book are about dr. larch's past. very little of this appears in the film. i read the book before watching the film but i think both are good. i admit i had higher expectations from the film but really, the book is worth a read i can tell u that!

reply

[–] joseph_cartier 18 years ago

im 16, and i have just finished reading the book. and watched the movie. im 16 and i loved the book, hwta a great read. the movie was awsome to. the movie focused on homer wells alot more thenanybody else. where as int he book the characters where in more depth. the movie is mostly the middle of the book. i loved boh the book and the movie. the movie really gave me an idea of who homer was, and the book just put it into perspective for me. btu i got to tell you. both were very good.

reply

[–] maurice_anemaat 18 years ago

gotta say tobey maguire was an outstanding cast...

I think the story's too difficult to put in a movie, can understand people who see only the movie might find it a bit dull at some times. It perfectly captures the feeling I got throughout reading the book.

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tek-09 18 years ago

The movie is pretty much the same as the book but its really only the basic story...the book goes it too much more detail...if you liked the movie i would recommmend reading the book...i thought it was really good...the movie is too but like i said, the book goes into much more detail and you get a lot of background on the characters

reply

[–] randyhndrsn 17 years ago

The book has alot more then the movie has, and there is some sexual and certain things that would of made the film rated R if they had been put into the film.The book is kinda long and the film is only about 2 hours, so alot of was cut out ofcourse but I think all of Dr. Larch's early life being cut out isn't that big of a deal.But perhaps the ending needed work in the movie, the book had enough story for this to be a 3 hour film and they did the best they could with a movie and I thought it was a pretty well done film with a great cast.

reply

[–] jescci 17 years ago

It's been a while since I read it, but I recall a subplot about an orphan named Melony who does not appear in the movie at all. She was highly sexed (they may have melded some of those qualities into the Mary Agnes character)ran off and got a job at a competing apple orchard. Recall she got into some trouble and was guilty of one or several acts of violence possibly defending herself against sexual advances. R

Recall Hazel's adoptive father sexually abusing her. Irving's stuff always has this kind of darkness and preversion.

Several of his books have a highly sexed, uninhibitted Melony-type character.

Movie more or less boiled down to a love story between Homer and Candy. It was a less prominent a part of the book.

People never lock their doors in this town.
They will tonight.

reply

[–] Beatle412 17 years ago

Spoiler to the book!

Also, I do believe that Homer and the Girl, (Candy?) get pregnant and they carry the baby to term, but tell her husband it's adopted. Don't remember very clearly, it's been about 10 years since I read the book.

Steph

reply

[–] della_robbia 17 years ago

the play version was great- about 6 hours total, cut in half, but watching a young 20 something actor playing Homer go from being a baby to young adult in under 45 minutes it's worth it!

reply