In the Heat of the Night--Rough Draft

[spreadmywings]

The novel In the Heat of the Night was far more exceptional than the movie In the Heat of the Night. Three reasons for that would be two of the characters, Virgil Tibbs and Sam Wood, and the Plot line.

The character, Virgil Tibbs, was portrayed far better in the novel then the movie. In the novel Virgil was calm and composed while in the movie he was angry and emotional. An example of this is in the movie Virgil went to see Endicott at his house and Endicott says something that triggers something off in Virgil and he slaps Endicott. In the novel Virgil would never have done that, even if Endicott made a racial comment about him. Fortunately Virgil was kept as the main character. He's the root of the whole story.

Another Character, Sam Wood, was also portrayed far better in the novel then the movie. In the novel Sam was a major character, but in the movie he was just of of the officers in the movie who played of little importance to the movie. With doing that a little subplot disappeared, his romance with Duena Mantoli. That one little subplot made the novel way better and more interesting. Also in the novel Sam demonstrated that people can change their views on people. Again that disappears in the movie.

The plot was far better in the novel then the movie. In the novel it was well constructed and easy to follow. While in the movie it was poorly constructed and hard to follow. The book took time to look at the minor character as well as get history on the major character. In the movie they stuck to explaining two characters, Virgil Tibbs and Bill Gillespie. They lost a really interesting subplot between Sam Wood and Duena Mantoli. You would get lost watching the movie if you hadn't read the book. At the end of the story, in the novel, the whole murder was explained. The end of the movie was a classic Hollywood shootout with no meaning what so ever.

As you can see the novel In the Heat of the Night was far more exceptional than the movie because of Virgil Tibbs, Sam Wood and the plot line.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

This is Due on Friday so if you girls could get to editing it that would be mush appreciated

[Vanya]

I'm just going to take different passages and make changes to them in a different color, k? Much easier.

"The novel In the Heat of the Night was far more exceptional than the movie. Three reasons for that would be two of the characters, Virgil Tibbs and Sam Wood, and the plot line."
- I took out the title of the movie because it's a bit repetitive. Also 'plot' doesn't need to be capitalized.

"The main character, Virgil Tibbs, was portrayed far better in the novel than the movie. In the novel Virgil was calm and composed while in the movie he was angry and emotional. An example of this is that in the movie Virgil went to see Endicott at his house and Endicott says something that triggers something off in Virgil and he slaps Endicott."
- Just saying 'the character, Virgil Tibbs' makes him sound like he's the only character.

"Another character, Sam Wood, was also portrayed far better in the novel than the movie. In the novel Sam was a major character, but in the movie he was just one of the officers in the movie who *played of little importance to the movie.* With doing that a little subplot disappeared, his romance with Duena Mantoli. That one little subplot made the novel way better and more interesting. Also in the novel Sam demonstrated that people can change their views on people. Again that disappears in the movie.
- The starred sentence doesn't make very much sense.
- Also, saying slang-type stuff like 'way better' sounds a little too informal for most things that are written.

"The plot was far better in the novel than the movie. In the novel it was well constructed and easy to follow, while in the movie it was poorly constructed and hard to follow. The book took time to look at the minor characters as well as get history on the major characters. In the movie they stuck to explaining two characters, Virgil Tibbs and Bill Gillespie. They lost a really interesting subplot between Sam Wood and Duena Mantoli. You would get lost watching the movie if you hadn't read the book. At the end of the story, in the novel, the whole murder was explained. The end of the movie was a classic Hollywood shootout with no meaning whatsoever."
- I assume there was more than one minor character and more than one major character?
- whatsoever is one word, for future reference.

Also, titles (i.e. the title of the movie) should be either italicized or underlined, I can't remember which. But it makes them easier to see and also less intrusive than a bunch of random capitals in the middle of a sentence. That bothers me, at least.

Otherwise, lovely writeup thingy.

[spreadmywings]

thanks...but I already handed it in...lol

[Vanya]

oh well... next time you're handing something in I'll try to review it faster. =)