Tha Last Of The Mohicans Essay Research
Tha Last Of The Mohicans Essay, Research Paper
The Last of the Mahicans
By James Fenimore Cooper
The book, Last of the Mohicans by James Fenimore Cooper was really different from the film Last of the Mohicans in footings of the narrative line. However, I feel that the manufacturer and manager of this film did a good occupation of continuing Cooper & # 8217 ; s original vision of the authoritative American adult male lasting in the wilderness, while perchance showing it better than the book. The shapers of the film Last of the Mohicans preserved Cooper & # 8217 ; s cardinal thoughts and subjects really good, the most of import of which is the inquiry, what makes a adult male? Very few books that I have read contain such a clear sense of what a adult male should be as Last of the Mohicans. Cooper portrays the hero, Hawkeye, as brave, independent, and skillful in the ways of the forests. He is a tracker, he can hit a mark with a slug from any distance, he can contend the evil Iroquois Indians without batting so much as an cilium. The shapers of the film take great strivings to continue these facts of Hawkeye. In the book, Hawkeye displays really small feeling and the reader has really small empathy with him, even though he is the hero. In the film, nevertheless, there is a great love affair between Hawkeye and Cora that does non be in the book. This love affair adds a more human side to Hawkeye & # 8217 ; s character ; it show s his caring side beyond all the hero-woodsman qualities, in other words, the non-Rambo, late 20th century version of a hero. Every hero should hold a adult female at his side, and the shapers of the film. This I think was a wise pick because it gave the spectator more things in common with the hero and therefore made Hawkeye a more human hero and hence more in common to the late 20th century spectator. One thing the shapers of the film attempted to maintain was the vision portrayed in the book of sweeping landscapes, mammoth trees, dark woods, crashing waterfalls, and other impressive characteristics of nature. This once more was a wise pick, seeing as how portion of Cooper & # 8217 ; s vision was the goodness and power of nature. Due to the fact that movie nowadayss such characteristics in a more graphic, more appealing manner than pages of descriptive words. One thing the shapers of the film left out that was originally in the book was the character of David Gamut, the psalmist. Of all the characters in the book I felt his was best developed by Cooper ; about all of the others were unlifelike characters with no deepness. Gamut, nevertheless, is at the get downing portrayed as anything but a hero He is clumsy, doesn & # 8217 ; t believe in killing other work forces even Indians, and is something of what we would today name a? softie? . However, he goes through many “ tests by fire ” and in the terminal is shaped into Cooper & # 8217 ; s version of the American adult male. However, the film shapers unhappily left out his character wholly. Though David Gamut was non an of import portion of Cooper
’s vision, he still played apart in it. He developed throughout the book from a wimpy coward to one who took up arms in the final battle, placing his life in God’s hands and throwing caution to the wind. I cannot see a reason for removing his character other than the producers possibly wishing to remove all semblance of comedy from the movie and thus make it a very serious film. I think this is a stupid reason, because his character added much more to the story than a few jokes, and had I been the director I would have included his character, perhaps even embellished it in the same manner as Hawkeye. Another alteration the movie made from the book was in the character of Cora. In the book, Cora is much braver and less delicate than her sister, Alice. For this she is “punished” in that she dies in the end. While this is not a central theme of Cooper in the book, he makes it clear that women, or “females” as he insists on calling them, should remain tame and conform to the standards men set for them. In the movie, the makers reverse this idea. Cora is again portrayed as stepping beyond the boundaries of acceptable female behavior at that point in history. In fact, the moviemakers take Cora farther “out of bounds” than Cooper did. She carries a pistol, and even shoots an Indian to keep herself and her sister safe. However, in behaving this way, she is transformed into a character that more closely resembles a late twentieth century ideal of the independent, self-sufficient woman, probably to make her more sympathetic to today’s movie audience. Instead of being “punished ” she ends up with Daniel Day-Lewis! Cora’s sister Alice goes around with eyes blank, mouth amazed, looking like some delicate piece of china that someone is throwing rocks at. She cannot believe her eyes, and so she simply detaches herself from the world around her. This happens in both the movie and the book, although in the movie, instead of falling in love with Duncan Heyward, the man in the story, she shows some interest in Uncas, though this is not made clear. In the end, when Magua, the evil antagonist, kills Uncas and Alice is presented with the choice of being Magua’s wife or killing herself, she chooses death. Cooper’s original intent was to have Cora killed for being “impudent,” while Alice remained tame and alive. Instead the makers of the movie transform even the wimpy Alice into a character of strength and independence as shown in her final act of suicide. Cora, also strong and blessed with the ability to think for herself throughout the film, survives. If these changes added a lot to the characters of both Cora and Alice, who in the book were stick figures, “females” who did virtually nothing but be saved and because of this again reinforces my opinion that the movie retains Cooper’s vision and present sit better than Cooper did himself.