"Once Upon a Time" Film Adaptation

Plot
The film opens with a paranoid woman working late at night in a library. As soon as it is closing time, she runs to the door and sets a series of locks on all the entrances. She leaves all the lights on in the library and cautiously checks around all the bookshelves to make sure she is alone. Then, she continues on with her work while still looking nervous and worried. While checking in books, she falls asleep and begins to dream a children's story. Her dream appears as the short story is told. The film follows the same plot as the children's story within the short story. At the end, after the little boy is being carried back into the house, the final shot of the film is of the woman jumping awake in the library. By showing the woman's previous behavior and reaction to the story, the meaning of the short story is better emphasized. The paranoid actions of the woman before the story happens and the realization afterwards show the meaning of over protection. Over protection can be dangerous; if someone is afraid of everything, eventually they become afraid of nothing. Instead of having the woman planning the children's story like at the beginning of the short story, the unexpected dream causes the event to seem more like a sudden realization rather than a planned attempt to prove a point. It makes the meaning seem less straightforward and intentional; therefore, the meaning is revealed in a dramatic and less boring way.

Point of View
The film should still be told from the same point of view as the short story. The beginning is told from the first person point of view in order to make it more personal and sympathetic. The short story is then told in the same way that a typical children's story is told. It is presented from the third person point of view as the narrator focuses in on the family. This point of view is the best way to present the storyline and convey the meaning of the work. It makes the story personal and the frame story sympathetic. Therefore, the point of view should not be changed for the film adaptation because it best shows the meaning as it originally was told.

Characterization
The woman telling the story should be an extremely paranoid librarian. She should be constantly worried and nervous about everything that goes on in the library. Her overly cautious actions like setting a series of locks on the entrances and checking behind every bookshelf help to emphasize the meaning of over protection. She becomes so caught up in her paranoia that she dreams up this tragic attempt at a children's story. Her overprotective actions only cause her to have more pointless worrying and stress in her life. In addition, her job as a librarian creates irony as she dreams about writing a children's story. The irony of this frame story adds to the meaning because it shows how involved people can become in their work and actions to the point where it becomes hazardous to their well being.

Setting
The setting of the beginning should be in a library instead of an old house. By changing the location, it makes the frame story more relevant to the outside story. Thinking of a children's story does not seem as out of place and random if it takes place within a library full of other stories. This also creates an ironic situation as the woman wakes up from the children's story to find herself surrounded by more stories. The frame story should have the same setting. The children's story should not be changed because it is written in a way that can be presented as a film without alterations. The meaning of the children's story is best displayed if the setting is not changed in any way. However, the setting of the outside story would create irony and draw attention to the meaning if it were changed to another locations such as a library.

Theme
The theme of the short story is the danger of over protection. The family is so concerned for their safety that they forgot their own son's safety. They were paranoid about being safe from the outside world, but they did not think about the dangers this may bring into their inside world. When someone is afraid of everything, eventually they become afraid of nothing. Over time, paranoia about everything causes the real danger to be overlooked. This theme is presented in the short story and should be shown in the film because it is an important aspect of the meaning of the work. Therefore, the theme should not be changed or adapted when making the short story into a film.

Minority Report Film

Plot
The plot of the film is nothing like the plot of the short story. There are only a few small similarities between the plots. At the beginning, Anderton's name is given as the future murderer of a person he does not even know. He initially believes he is being set up by someone. Then, at the end of the story, he comes to a realization and ends up killing the person he did not think he was ever going to. However, the storyline, characters, climax, and situations are completely different from each other. Similarly, this story also follows a winding plot. There are many unexpected turns in the plot that add to the suspenseful effect of the story. While Anderton is working at Precrime, a ball rolls down with his name printed on the murderer line and a second one appears with the name "Leo Crow" printed on it as the man he is going to kill. He then tries to run away from Precrime saying Witwer is plotting against him. However, the story then continues down an uncertain path that is unrelated to the short story. Although the two versions are very different in comparison between storylines, they both follow the same plot type. They have changing storylines with unexpected turning points, even though the turning points are about different things.

Point of View
While the short story is written from the third person point of view, the film is told from the first person point of view. It follows the life of Anderton and is told from his perspective instead of having a narrator. By telling the story from Anderton's perspective, it makes the audience sympathize with the main character and follow him throughout the storyline. It adds to the suspenseful tone of the movie because the audience only knows what the main character knows. They do not know who Leo Crow really is or where the story is going to lead next. As Anderton finds out clues in the film, so does the audience. This point of view allows for the audience to picture the events like they are actually happening; this creates an effect that could not be achieved by only having a narrator and dialogue for the entire story.

Characterization
The characters in the film are significantly different from those in the short story. In the story, Anderton is supposed to be the founder of Precrime and near retirement. However, in the film he is just a worker at Precrime who helps carry out the missions. In the story, Anderton is supposed to murder Leopold Kaplan. In the film, Anderton is supposed to murder Leo Crow. Anderton's wife has varying roles in the two versions. She works at Precrime and is happily married to Anderton in the story. However, in the film, she is divorced and lives away from Anderton because he reminds her of their son who was kidnapped while Anderton was watching him (the son does not even exist in the short story). The son, Sean, plays an important role in the film because he is what drives Anderton to work at Precrime to try to prevent future crimes, and Sean is the reason Anderton is supposed to murder Leo Crow.

Setting
The film takes place in a similar setting to the short story. They both occur in a futuristic and nonexistent world. They take place at a place called Precrime which contains Precogs who can see crimes before they occur. However, in the film, the time between the prediction and the actual crime seems much more rushed than in the story. The time in the story is usually about two weeks but in the film it is a matter of days. The Precogs also play a more important role in the film than in the story. They are in a tank of water instead of attached to a bunch of wires and cords like it says in the story. They can also not only report the crime by speaking it out loud like in the story, but in the film they can also create a picture of the crime as it occurs. The Precogs play a significant role in the film while they seem somewhat minor in the short story.

Theme
While the film and short story are very different, they have a similar theme. They both show how free will can affect people's futures. Near the end of the film, Anderton comes face to face with Leo Crow, the man he believes is responsible for the kidnapping of his little boy. He says that ever since the event happened, he has been wondering two things: what Sean would look like if he was still alive today and what he would do if he ever met the person responsible. Now that he has met the person he thinks is responsible, he must choose whether to get revenge or to arrest him. Anderton eventually chooses to do the right thing and not kill Crow. He does this because he has free will. He has the choice to kill or not to kill Crow. He has control over his future based off of how he lives his life in the present. This theme is the same as in the story, even though they occur under different circumstances and in different situations.

"Popular Mechanics" ~by Raymond Carver

(#7)
I Kings 3 in the Bible tells the story of two women who both claimed to be the mother of a baby. They both came to Solomon wanting to be given ownership of the child. Solomon's solution was to tell them to cut the child in half and split it between the two women. The false mother agreed to the solution. However, the real mother demanded instead that the child just be given to the other woman. Solomon realized that the real mother's love for her baby would be shown because she would rather her child be given to someone else than for it to be killed. This story is similar because it is about two people arguing for ownership of their child. The couple both claims to be deserving of the child, and they do not want the other to have it. However, this story does not have a happy ending. Instead of agreeing upon a solution, the couple lets their hate for each other get in the way of their child's safety. Their disagreement becomes violent to the point where they both end up killing the baby because they cannot agree. Instead of agreeing on something that would be best for the baby, they both are selfish and care only about themselves. They both want the baby, but in the end their carelessness and selfishness ends up killing the thing they are fighting about. They focused so much on their own problems that they lost sight of the baby and it became just an object to possess out of selfishness. "She would have it, this baby. She grabbed for the baby's other arm. She caught the baby around the wrist and leaned back. But he would not let go. He felt the baby slipping out of his hands and he pulled back very hard. In this manner, the issue was decided" (page 345).

"You're Ugly, Too" ~by Lorrie Moore

(#4)
"She used to insist it was irony, something gently layered and sophisticated, something alien to the Midwest, but her students kept calling it sarcasm, something they felt qualified to recognize, and now she had to agree. It wasn't irony" (page 353). Zoë makes this distinction early in the story between irony and sarcasm. "For about ten years of my life I had to map out every sentence in my mind, way ahead, before i said it. That was the only way I could get a coherent sentence out...I told a lot of jokes. Jokes you know the lines to already - you can just say them. I love jokes. Jokes and songs" (page 365). This is an example of irony. It is ironic that the only way Zoë could talk was by telling jokes, but now she spends her life writing books about humor. She used to not be able to form coherent sentences; however, now she is writing books. "What is your perfume? a student once asked her. Room freshener, she said" (page 353). This is an example of sarcasm. Sarcasm is something said with a more joking tone. Irony is similar to sarcasm; however, irony is more complex and refined. Irony is something that can be thought about and seems paradoxical but actually makes sense.

"The Drunkard" ~by Frank O'Connor

(#6)
The principal irony in the story is the role reversal between the father and son. The father is an alcoholic who rarely drinks; however, he cannot control himself whenever he does. He always ends up drinking too much and is too drunk to go into work the next day. Therefore, his family suffers from not earning money on those days. When the father plans on going to the funeral, the mother sends their son with him to try to prevent the father from getting drunk. Instead, the son ends up drunk. The son becomes easily irritated, angry, and yells at the neighbors on the way home. As they walk down the street, the neighbors watch and begin to gossip about it. "I was maddened by the women's shrieks of laughter. I was maddened by Father's bullying. I tried to dig in my heels but he was too powerful for me, and I could only see the women by looking back over my shoulder" (page 350). The next day, the son is home in bed and the father is at work. This is a complete reversal of roles from the normal lives of the family.

"The Lottery" ~by Shirley Jackson

(#8)
This story is presented from the objective point of view. The omniscient narrator tells the story as someone looking onto the event, but they do not closely relate to any of the characters. This creates the dispassionate, matter-of-fact tone of the story. The narrator does not tell the feelings or characteristic of any of the characters. This creates the impersonal aspect of the story. Instead of focusing in on Mrs. Hutchinson or any of the other characters, the narrator speaks only about the facts of the event. They tell about the lottery, the normal ceremony, and the box. However, the narrator does not mention the feelings of the characters. When Mrs. Hutchinson chooses the black spot paper and claims "It isn't fair," the narrator quickly moves along to the stoning (page 271). The narrator shows no emotion as "Tessie Hutchinson was in the center of a cleared spot by now, and she held her hands out desperately as the villagers moved in on her...a stone hit her in the side of the head" (page 271). The way the narrator tells the story effectively reflects the opinions of the villagers. It shows how the ritual became habit. It happened every year, and they all just accepted the cruel action because that is how it had always been.