Novel
in sentence
2054 examples of Novel in a sentence
Joseph Conrad's novel, Heart of Darkness is a dark, profound, and lasting
novel
that portrays the futility and irony taking place in Africa.
Conrad holds nothing back when describing 19th century imperialism, but the
novel
is meaningless without giving it the reflection and consideration it deserves.
If I read this
novel
looking for a great adventure story I would say that I wasted my time, but looking at in the perspective of explaining the futility of 19th century civilization, I would say this is one of the most significant novels I have ever read.
Because of the fact that I read this
novel
in my English class, and we analyzed every page, I think I appreciated the book more than someone would who was just reading it for entertainment.
I am not going to lie, this book was difficult and it challenges the reader to dig deep into this
novel
to find the true meaning.
If you are having difficulty understanding and visualizing the
novel
then the movie might be a good recourse but I would not recommend seeing the movie as an alternative to the
novel
or even a different perspective.
This movie is based on a Stephen King
novel
in which mysterious new shopkeeper Leland Gaunt (Max Von Sydow) offers each citizen of Castle Rock the item he or she most desires - but there is a heavy price to be paid for these transactions.
This disaster flick is a remake of a 1973 movie of the same title, based on a
novel
by Sakyo Komatsu.
The
novel
WEAPON which serves as the basis for this atrocious piece of garbage is one of the best techno-thrillers to come down the pike in a long time.The character of SOLO, who is NOT supposed to look like a human, is a wonderful creation and it was simply awful to see him reduced to just another Terminator-clone with Mario Van Peebles horrendously trying to "act" like a robot.
The
novel
on which the film was based was a straight thriller and I think could have been played straight to better effect--and still could be.
Lost Horizon, by James Hilton, is perhaps less than a classic, but not a bad
novel.
The film is for some reason set back in the early 1790's, rather than the Regency period where the
novel
is set, as scholars have long shown.
Yet the Bennets in the
novel
are gentry class; they own a farm, but the pig does not walk through the house, nor is the farmyard of manure and chicken droppings contiguous to the home.
Scenes are re-set from the novel,and lest we forget, Jane Austen placed scenes in certain locations for a reason.
The petite Tom Hollander is a brilliant actor: but Mr. Collins is described in the
novel
as tall and heavy-looking, which suggests that his terrible dancing with poor Lizzy is elephantine.
Matthew MacFayden is another favorite of mine from MI-5 on A&E; in P&P, however, he is more the young Heathcliffe, never smiling--though Austen observes in the
novel
that Darcy smiles at Lizzy quite a bit, and she realizes this when she sees his wonderful smiling portrait at Pemberley--a portrait that in this movie is for some reason replaced by a sculptured marble bust.And much of Austen's dialogue is changed to modern speech.
The bottom line is that while this is a great movie to watch and hear, it deviates from Jane Austen's
novel
so much that any student who watched it, thinking she could substitute viewing for reading, would fail!
The ending was nothing short of "hey we've run out of budget let's stop it here NOW!!"...If I'd written a
novel
that ended this way I'd top myself.
Based on the excellent novel, Watchers by Dean Koontz, is this extremely awful motion picture that probably shouldn't be viewed by anyone.
This dog of a production does NOT do her wonderful tongue in cheek
novel
any justice.
They tried to make a large-scale epic out of a low-key romantic
novel
and the result is terrible.
Distasteful British film from a Japanese
novel
about a very troubled young man who comes under the influence of a Hitler-like classmate and plots to harm his widowed mother's lover.
One problem I see is that the magnitude of the
novel
asks for a miniseries of several hours, rather than a regular movie.
The idea of him strolling around on a beach moaning about his life seems inconsistent with the proactive, forward-thinking nature Dickens gave him in the
novel.
It is difficult to imagine how the engaging Dan Brown
novel "
Angels and Demons" could misfire as badly as this film version.
However, the script was not only predictable (except for the last scene), but the dialogue was treacly and sounded as if it was lifted from a third-rate romance
novel.
Jean George's
novel
is a fantastic book that I think is an outstanding read for any child.
If you're an average guy like me and enjoy good acting, good plot, good scripts,
novel
ideas, or being entertained, you might want to skip this one.
The
novel
records the real life experiences of Rudy van Dantzig, as told thru the boy Jeroen, during the waning days of WWII at age 11 as he deals with his incipient sexuality, and his deep fears of abandonment as he has been sent to the province of Friesland, north of Holland by his parents because of the lack of food in Amsterdam and has not heard from them in many months as the postal service has broken down.. The arrival of the liberating soldiers in the film, is presented in a painfully corny way, with the soldiers providing entertainment vaudeville style.
Badly shot, badly edited, clumsy dialogue, flat characters, unsuccessful adaption of a
novel.
Back
Next
Related words
Based
Movie
Which
About
Story
Adaptation
There
Would
Version
Great
Original
Their
First
Could
Characters
Screen
After
Never
Author
Written