29 thoughts on “Post responses here for A Streetcar Named Desire (film). Talk about your impressions, ideas, confusions, how it is different from the play, etc..”
After reading ‘The streetcar named desire’, the movie seemed identical. As it went on there were minor changes that I noticed. The one that stood out to me the most was the story about Blanche’s lover. I interpreted it differently in the reading and I wonder if this subject was too scandalous at the time for a play, so it had to be changed. I do think this part was very interesting and was sad to see it go. It seemed to lack the same meaning and importance. Another part that stood out to me that wasn’t necessarily different from the reading was the scene where Blanche is being taken away by the doctor. This scene was so much more powerful being able to see it. You were able to capture all her emotion, confusion, and uncertainty. In the end it seems that Stella is aware of what her husband Stanley has done to Blanche, which does not seem evident in the reading. She says she is never going back to Stanley and runs upstairs to her neighbors apartment. Although she seemed weak to him before, there seems to be a change in their dynamic as a couple. I thoroughly enjoyed the play and movie and think they complimented each other very nicely. The actors couldn’t have don’t a better job at depicting their characters.
The film for the most part did follow the same script that was written by Tennessee Williams. The few changes that they did make though did not change the plot and the overall events of the story by much. Some of them I did not like such as how they started the movie. Instead of showing how Stanley and Stella are normally they showed Blanche asking for directions. This could have been done to help explain the importance of the names of the Streetcars and the street where they live and also shows how helpless Blanche really is.
It was also interesting in how they talked about Blanche’s deceased husband. While it was it was heavily inferred that he was having an affair with an older man it was not mentioned in the film. She only described him as a weak man who was unable to do anything. This probably was done because during this time homosexuality was an intensely taboo subject that people would not bring up. Even the scenes of violence against either Stella or Blanche were never actually shown. We only heard Stella being hurt and the only a broken mirror was shown. This could also have been used to symbolize the breaking of her mind and soul.
One of the glaring differences though was how they ended the film. Instead of Stella finding comfort in Stanley’s arms she initiated a new found strength in leaving him. I thought this felt awkward. While he was abusive it never seemed like she was going to leave. They do imply that people accuse him of the rape but it seems slightly off since Blanche was so traumatized by it that she repressed the memory of it. This creates an even more tragic ending than it originally had.
The director generally kept to the script in terms of dialogue and only shortens some scenes down a bit. The use of the poker music was also kept throughout within the proper context. One major difference was with the amount of locations that the movie used. Unlike a stage where a director is limited to space the movie embraced different locations. For instance the opening scene in the movie shows Blanche coming out of the train station and finding her way to Stella’s flat by way of “a street car named Desire.” However in the play the opening scene starts with Stanley and Mitch entering toward the Kowalski flat. The movie also showcases the bowling alley which, although spoken about in the play several times, is never seen.
The biggest difference that I noticed had to do with the contents of Blanche’s late husbands demise. In the movie she explains that he never worked and couldn’t support the family and because of that she lost all respect for him and the revelation of this information drove him to suicide. ON the contrary the play reveals that Allen was a secret homosexual who Blanche caught in bed with his best friend. This is the information that disgusted her and the shame that she enforced on Allen ultimately drove him suck on a revolver. I believe that the director chose to eliminate this fact from the film specifically because at the time homosexuality was not a topic that was discussed freely, and considering that a movie can be seen by an endless supply of people the topic would be too controversial to express.
A streetcar named desire, in this movie the director Elia Kazan portrays the unstable life of a mid-aged single woman through Blanche’s character who is depressed and lonely. Blanche lost her young husband when they both were young. Then her father passed away who was in a huge amount of debt and the creditors had to seize all of his property to get their money. And Blanche had no other place to live. She moved in a hotel room. Although she was teaching in a high school as an English teacher but she became depressed and lonely after losing her beloved family, so she quit the job. Since she was lonely she started seeing many men to overcome her loneliness and tried to find her late husband through those strangers. She was trying to find the love from those men as the same way her husband did. But her fate was very unfortunate and she ended up living in that hotel room permanently as the owner of the hotel just used her to bring more customers. Then she went to Mississippi to stay with her sister Stella and her husband Stanley who were living in a dingy apartment. When Blanche met them she discovered that Stanley was from a lower class than her sister, a man with no education, no humanity and benevolence. He was reckless about life, a gambler and abused his wife all time. Stanley was greedy too; he was very impatient to find out what Blanche did with all the properties and asked her to hand him over the papers. When Blanche told Stanley that all the properties were taken away by the creditors, Stanley became very aggressive toward Blanche and started digging her past to find out the truth. Blanche and Stella were born and raised in a rich family; therefore Blanche was dramatic toward life and had a passion for fancy clothes (dancing with the song, paper lantern). But Stanley couldn’t stand Blanche anymore seeing her wearing fancy clothes and living in his apartment while Stella and he were struggling to live their life. Blanche finally found a loving and caring person for her who was also Stanley’s friend Mitch. However, Stanley found out about Blanche’s past life and told everything to Mitch which just didn’t jeopardize the relationship between Blanche and Mitch also created so much hatred. Blanche was very concerned about her age and always tried to hide it (affection of darkness), so she could meet with a younger man than her which might make her feel that she’s spending time with her late young husband. This movie makes us understand the cruel reality of life that once we lose the things we love, we become so lonely and depressed. Then we try different things, sometimes totally new things just to forget about out past which might turn into a disaster and makes our life more miserable and lead one’s life to insanity. In the movie the director didn’t show that who and why they decided to send Blanche to asylum. But in the play it was clear that after Stanley raped Blanche, Stella who decided to send Blanche to the asylum, as a way to bury the whole truth and probably to save Blanche from Stanley’s animosity. An asylum might not be a better place for Blanche but it’ll be at least a safer place where no one could abuse Blanche’s desire for love and turn it into sexual pleasure.
The movie “A Streetcar Named Desire” was a film that kept me on the edge of my seat. When the film first started I said to myself “oh boy, this film seems like its going to put me to sleep.” When Blanche Dubois open her mouth an I heard the accent I figured this should be interesting. The protagonist Blanche first arrived at Elysian field she seem very high class from the way she walked, dressed and carried her self with so much poised.When Blanche arrived , looked around and observed the neighborhood as if she was came to the wrong place. Blanche didn’t expect for her sister to be living in a neighborhood that appears to be ghetto and low class. From just that scene alone, I can tell that Blanche wasn’t pleased that she would staying there during her visit.
One of the scenes in the beginning of the film that confused me is when Blanche first had an conversation with Stanley In the house . The way her eyes caressed Stanley body I felt as if she was admiring him and maybe wanted him. Stanley is profoundly attracted man, especially when is isn’t drunk or behaving like an “animal” as
Miss Blanche would say. One scene in the film where Stellar who is Blanche sister had an physical altercation with Stanley which she is married too , Blanche questioned her reasons for wanting to marry a man like Stanley who is considered to be an “Common” Stanley can be seen most of the time in the film as drunk,angry, and abusive towards stellar who is pregnant by him. Stellar seems to be not disturbed by her husband behavior. Stanley abusive violent ways seem to be a normal thing In the couples marriage.
In the film Blanche appeared to me overly dramatic, she feeds of people complimenting her, and treating her as if she loyalty. Blanche compulsive lies, and delusional ways cheated her out of a man name Mitch who felt for her beautiful lies , an the new person she appeared to be in the new town. Towards the ending of the film i felt bad that Stanley wanted her gone for good. I believed she deserved an second chance to start a new page of her life.
In the movie, A Streetcar Named Desire, I discovered that when Stella & Blanche were talking about the “streetcar named Desire” they weren’t actually speaking of the trolley, but more so the means that had brought them to that point—the course they had taken in their respective lives. How riding the wave of what they longed for—what they’d been yearning, had taken them so far from the life they’d both known. Also that initial interaction between Blanche and Stanley was the exact opposite of what I got from the play. The play built Stanley up to be an ultimate lady-killer, yet the movie portrays Blanche in that scene as literally getting the hots for him. In the play, I thought Stanley had subdued her and she went willingly to bed with him. To the contrary, in the movie Blanche was raped by the brother-in-law.
One thing in the movie that stood out the most for me though –versus in the play, was that I got a much better understanding of exactly how long Blanche’s visit was. In reading the play it seems as though merely a few weeks has elapsed. However, to see the physical changes in Stella throughout the course of her pregnancy really put things into perspective. Upon Blanche’s arrival Stella’s pregnancy wasn’t showing at all—and by the end of the movie the baby boy is not only born, but seems to be at least 1 month old!
Realizing that Blanche had been there during the entire pregnancy and stayed after the child was born; sharing a small flat with one bathroom and no more than a curtain for “privacy”. It’s no wonder there was so much tension. Until this realization I couldn’t understand why Stanley seemed to put so much emphasis on reminding Stella how things were before and about the colored lights. I suppose not being able to live as husband and wife for such an extended time is enough to make ANYone bullish. I was however, surprised at how eagerly Stella returned home after Stanley slapped her. From what I read in the play it seemed to me that maybe Stella went downstairs just to quiet his drunken cries. In the movie though, she practically ran down the stairs. I was almost expecting that she may jump into his arms and play that stereotypical battered-wife role (complete with “no…I’m sorry”). Instead something happened between them…and I credit the actors for manifesting this—but whatever connection Stella and Stanley had that I thought was lost when I heard that slap—it drew her back toward him with a mind blowing hunger. I couldn’t believe that he’d just slapped the hell out of her (and wouldn’t it have been worse if the guys didn’t pull him away?) and here she was consumed with lust and practically sexing on the porch.
A Streetcar Named desire is a Nineteen Fifty-One film based on the play by Tennessee Williams. It follows the basic plot of the play but the Motion Picture Production Code, a set of rules that movies of it’s time period needed to follow, led several major elements of the original play being cut from the movie. Most notably the more overt references the play made to Blanche’s sexuality and promiscuity, the homosexuality of Blanche’s ex-husband which led to him killing himself some time before the events of the story, and Stanley’s rape of Blanche at the story’s climax which in the play is made much more implicit. The decisions were made almost entirely to comply with the standards of the movie industry of the Nineteen Fifties. One major artistic difference made to the film was that of the ending, the ending of the movie ends on a slightly happier note with Stella seeming to make the decision to take their child and leave Stanley for good, while in the play whether or not Stella leaves Stanley is left more ambiguous. The happier ending was made to please the broader audience a film reaches than a play especially after the tragedy of Blanche’s character. The difference’s in the movie compared to the play leave the impression that Stanley is less of a monster, though he is still an angry violent man who causes great emotional and physical harm to the two women in his life, his wife Stella and her sister Blanche. It is thus fitting that he is left alone without his wife or child at the end of the movie.
When I saw the movie some of my opinions about the characters changed. Because when I was reading the book I was building my impression about characters on their dialogues and authors’s description of what was going on and how. But while watching movie I could clearly see how the heroes react,how the look at each other,how they feel.Usually when people read the book first they get dissappointedd with the movie later, because their expectations are not reached. But in this case I can definitely say that I liked the movie a lot and even more than the book.I saw such things which i didn’t notice while reading. For example, I could see how Blanche was looking at men, I could see how Stanley looked at her as well and from the men’s position i understood that he liked her in some way, that’s my point of view. At the same time I saw how strongly Stanley and Stella loved each other. At those moments when they had a conflict, after the fury and alcohol influence went away, they were becoming like two angels together.
The same story reffers to Meith.In the movie I saw how awkward he was indeed and how Blanche was playing with him when he was trying to kiss her.
In general, I saw every scene in the movie from different angle in comparison with the book. And that is what makes movies differ a lot from the books.
I’m wondering, Why the title of the story is “Streetcar Named Desire” I know there is an actual car named “Desire” in the story, the car that Blanche arrived to Elysian Fields in. It seems to be a metaphorical meaning somewhere in the story.
In the Book, Blanche seems a lot more confident when it came to handling Stanley’s negative attitude towards her as oppose to the fearing him in the movie.
In the beginning of the movie, Blanche went to the Bowling Alley to look for Stella, however; in the book, it was the Colored Woman who went and gets Stella. Another difference between the movie and the book is when Blanche went into the house in the first scene of the book. She had a drink of whisky before Stella arrived at the house and had a total of 3 glasses before Stella put it away. In the movie, she had only 2 glass assuming Stella would see her as a drunk.
I’ve seen this movie back in High School and for some reason, now that I’m older and watching and reading with different eyes, I feel more depressing. Blanche is so judgmental, yet so helpless.
I was very excited to watch the film adaptation of “A StreetCar Named Desire” because the play was so interesting and painted a clear image in my mind. In my head, I knew what all of the characters looked like and what the setting looked like as well. I have to say that there were certain aspects of the movie that did not match up to the image in my mind, but for the most part it did. Blanche, Stanley, Eunice, Steve, and the flat were depicted just as how i imagined it but Stella and the minor characters were slightly different. It is always interesting watching old films because the style of acting is much quicker and more emotionally dramatic in my opinion. In recent times, films are extremely graphic and physically disturbing and I think that we lost some of the old fashioned dramatics that A Street Car has because we think that we can make up for it by all of the dynamic special effects. One thing that bothered me was the difference in the ending. In the play, it does not specifically state that Stella leaves Stanley, but in the film she clearly has had enough of him. I am curious as to why the ending was changed, but I think it may be related to the historical context and the uprising of women’s rights. I enjoyed both the play and the film, but the play left more to the imagination and I always enjoy that more in a book.
My initial thoughts when watching the film were that the film was staying very true to the play. This is something you don’t see to often anymore with adaptions. I noticed very few deviations with the exception of where some of the scenes took place. If I’m not mistaken the entire play takes place in Stella and Stanley’s apartment but, in the film some scenes are moved into different locations. I.e Blanche and Stella meet at the apt not the bowling alley, and a scene in which Blanche and Mitch are on a date while in the play the interaction occurs after the date back at the apartment.
I assume some of the scene changes were implemented to give a change of scenery to the viewer and in some situations to make the scene a little less race considering the film was released in the 50’s. There were a few things in the film that had me confused and thinking about why would they change this, or that. I have come to the conclusion that most of it was probably censorship. I noticed that Stella never appears to be pregnant throughout the movie even though she delivers the baby nearing the end of the film. Another difference that I spotted were the events that lead to Blanches young husbands death. In the film she just says that on the dance floor she told her husband ” you’re weak, I’ve lost respect for you, I despise you”. In the play she had discovered her husband in what appears to be in a homosexual relationship with an older man and later tells her husband that she had seen everything and that he disgusts her.
The last major difference that I recall is the second to last scene, the altercation between Stanley and Blanche after Stanley returns from the hospital. The scenes are identical until the very end. In the play it is implied that Blanche is raped by Stanley but in the film he appears to physically assault her. Although there were minor deviations in the film many of which are do to the time the film was released I feel it is a fantastic adaption of the play and captured Tennessee Williams vision quite well.
For the most part, I thought the film did a great job depicting what happened in the play. The actors were perfectly chosen and the acting was phenomenal by everyone. This was the second movie that I’ve seen which starred Marlon Brando (Godfather was the first). To me, his acting is just at another level. I believe all actors in the movie played their roles quite well and accurate do that of the play.
However, there were a few parts that didn’t transfer over well from the play to the movie. Not all movies usually cover everything from the original books (if there are any original books), but this one was a bit different. I noticed a few things that were not depicted in the movie. The first was when Blanche mentioned her husband was a homosexual. I don’t recall seeing that or hearing much about it in the movie. She does mention that he shot himself when she stated that she was disgusted but I didn’t see her tell the full story. The second thing that I noticed which was extremely downplayed in the movie was the rape scene. It seemed like something that was very important in the book but was not really mentioned or shown much of in the movie.
Other than these few things, I thought the movie was great and deserved all the great reviews it has gotten. Is it something I would want to watch again in the future? I doubt it, but it was a fun movie to watch.
The movie A Streetcar Named Desire was surprisingly very similar to the book by Tennessee Williams. There were some differences like the beginning of the book was different than how the movie started with Stanley and the slight script changes. I think that because this was a play, the film was so similar. I usually hate movies that are recreated after a book. They change around so many things, that the image you had of the story while you were reading is completely different from what you watch at the movies. I think that the scene where Stanley rapes Blanche was a little ambiguous. But I think the reason for that was because this was an old play and showing too much might have inappropriate. I think they did a very good job portraying Blanche the way they did. She played the part perfectly. While I was watching the movie, she fit the picture of her i had created while i was reading the play. Stanley also played his manly vulgar part well. Stella was also a perfect fit, she was the quiet, sweet, younger sister who was always there for her older sister Blanche. Overall, I liked the film a lot because of how similar it was to the play.
Streetcar Named Desire movie by Elia Kazan, a movie based on Tennessee Williams’ book, is directly related to the book. Sometimes a movie based on some book does not correlate with the book itself or partly correlates with it. Whereas, this film was put strictly by the play of Tennessee Williams’ – word to word. I enjoyed the movie, however, when I imagined Stanley would play someone rougher and more primitive than Marlon Brando. I remember a scene when Stanley (Marlon Brando) eats meet using his hands – I could see how uncomfortable he was. I think a role of an intelligent, mannerly guy suits Marlon better. In addition, I imagined Stella as someone more sensitive and weaker than Kim Hunter. I think the role she plays in this movie does not really suit her, as I think she represents a strong type of women. I also wish that the movie was not black and white…
The film, like the book, is based on Aristotelian drama rules. It has almost all its elements: the plot, the character, the thought, the diction, the melody, and the spectacle. It definitely has the plot, the story. The character in Aristotelian drama has essential quality or nature that is revealed in the plot. Each character in this movie has four main qualities: good in some way, acts appropriately for his/her gender and station in life, has believable personality, and acts consistently throughout the film. The play has a thought – “where could bring desire”. The movie has diction – the manner the characters speak throughout the play. The film also has songs played few times. The film also definitely has spectacle – costumes of the actors and the scenery – the action takes place in the two-story building.
Overall, I liked A Streetcar Named Desire film by Elia Kazan – I enjoyed watching it and I would recommend watching it to others.
Christina. Radcliffe
In the film a street car named Desire compared to the book their are only few differences. First in the beginning Blanche arrives in New Orleans and finds her sister’s Stella house in New Orleans Elysian Fields to be greeted by her sister land lord Eunice. Now First off in the film I didn’t realize that Eunice owned the building. I also found it strange in the film compared to the book no one Knows that stella sister was coming to visit her. Also Eunice lets Blanche into Stella and stanley’s apartment. Not knowing if she really is stella sister are not and also in movie why would she just go and find her’s sister around the corner in the bowling Alley. Why wasn’t she waiting on Sister there seems to be very strange. I wondered if she new she was coming did come early than expected or what. In the book she waits on sister Stella to come to her instead her which makes more since to me, I wonder to myself why they change that part in the film it made more since. Also with that why didn’t they include the black singers and black people in the Film was it because of the time of the making of the movie was it budget cuts or something. I also wondered Why they never came out and just rather are not was Blanche a postitiute or what. Was she sleeping with military guys to.
Another thing I would like to add I watched the film first before I read the book. I didn’t understand why they didn’t explain why or how she lost her families home. In the film I wondered what happen she never shows paper’s or proof what happen and in the book explanation for all loans that was against the property and what truly happen. Its strange to me also hows she speaks of things she seemed crazy to me in the book but not in the film. Regardless where your from people didn’t speak. Stella even thinks at time she thinks Blanche thought she was talking strange and crazy at times. I can’t believe in the book she doesn’t believe her sister because in film she completely crazy afterwards stella comes home after having the baby that something had clearly happen between Blanche and Stanley. Also what I didn’t understand what Blanche meant. Scene 6 page 104 When Blanche says where going to be Bohemian and pretend that we are sitting in a little artists cafe on the left bank of paris. Now is Bohemian the right word for that ?.
Yes. Bohemian in the sense of living an unconventional lifestyle. It is often used to refer to artists or people living on the fringe of society. Around the turn of the 20th century, the left bank of Paris was a refuge for artists of all descriptions. See La Boheme, the opera on which the musical Rent is based.
I feel like the film, A Streetcar Name Desire was stray forward, no room for the audience to get lost or feel confused. Through out the film I just felt pity of Stella. Stella just wanted to live a happy life but instead she got a delusional sister and an insecure husband. The two sisters came from a wealthy family or at least in a comfortable economy position. One of the sisters for whatever the reason left the family and Blanche stayed. Stella marries Stanley Kowalski a possessive, controlling and with insecurities. There is more to the story line but I’m only going to talk about Stella’s evolution in the film.
The first scene between the two sisters relived the dynamic between Stella and Blanche that will play out through out the film. In the bowling scene, we see Blanches unease and in a way disgusted by the place or the world that she entered, witch is Stella’s world, now. As soon as Blanche and Stella seat and Blanche has the opportunity to “calmly” speak to Stella, all Blanche does is accused her Stella for leaving the heavy load of the family’s problems on her (Blanche). I Think Blanche, did it because she wanted to make her feel bad, Stella would feel guilty and in a way manipulate her to be at her service for the time that Blanche will reside at Stella’s home. I feel like Stella was Cinderella. Blanche made herself the dominate one in the sister relationship. I also feel that Blanche was jealous of her sister because she has what she wants, a relationship with a man and youth.
Stanley Kowalski, had an economic class insecurity. I feel like Stanley was afraid that Stella thought of him as being below her, she came from money and he didn’t, even though that the family became broke. Reason why he was very dominate and made sure that Stella new who was in charge. He would use his powerful voice and body to visually demonstrate that. Especially when he’ll get his ramp rage and start throwing things and start yelling at Stella and Blanche. In the scenes where he hit Stella and when he raped Blanche was all about letting them know that he was the one with the power.
Streetcar Named Desire: What was different from the book and the film? The difference for me was tone. As in any book the reader creates the characters, the dialogue is read and the tone and character dynamic is created in the readers own eye. As I read the book, I felt sorry for the Blanche’s character. I felt her story was a cover yet recognized her love and concern for her sister as something that was real and genuine. I read Stella as a bit of an enabler for both her sister and her husband. I read Stanley as being overly indulgent and self-righteous in his actions. Although the sister in law was annoying she did little to harm him. The book read more pure and I was able to understand the characters from my own perspective and experience.
I didn’t feel the same way watching the film. I felt the director and creative team had stripped away my personal perspectives and pushed these characters hard and fast in one direction. No one really changed or evolved they came in strong and ended just as strong. Blanche’s character was so blatantly annoying that it distracted the viewer from developing any sort of connection with her. Her bourgeois attitude and flaunting of stature and so called class was difficult to stomach. Her fishing for compliments and over acting was a definite turn off. Instead I felt myself more inclined to side with Stanley’s character as the movie made it seem that his actions came from a truer and more sincere perspective. But to put that thought to the side, I want to comment on the casting. I believe that casting Marlon Brando in this film was brilliance. His good looks and tight shirts overshadowed any real chance the film had as an exposé on woman. I go back to my other essay about how the book for me was a commentary on the distinction of acceptance and giving in to the cards one is dealt and living in a fantasy world. How could one notice co-dependent relationship between Stella and her husband when the violent and abusive husband is Marlon Brando. As a woman viewer I am naturally inclined to like him, regardless of his blowhard actions. The Blanche character was made to look a bit weathered and all the make-up and clothes did little to support the persona that I interpreted in the book. They instead cast doubt from the moment the film began instead of allowing the tragedy to build and follow unity of action. In this relationship the movement from book to film, I like the book better.
A lot of disconnects because it seems as though the viewer has to assume what’s going on, that is, if the viewer has never read the play. The movie lacks cohesion because of this, and the lack of cohesion creates confusion on what the clear theme of the story is. The movie was hard to follow and the actors didn’t really seem like they were acting but more like they were given their scripts and they were reading it for the first time. The movie doesn’t do a good job of delivering the descriptions of the scenes, and a lot of the back story that’s given in the play for the viewer to fully understand the story if they were to have never read the play. Some of the locations are different and some of the dialogue is placed in different scenes, or order, in the movie when compared to the movie.
At first the theme of the story seemed like it had something to do with domestic violence or some sort of family dispute, it seemed like it was all over the place in the movie. When the movie ended, it still wasn’t clear to me what the core of the story was really about. The movie was very upsetting as well because there wasn’t anything to connect with and couldn’t develop any type of affection towards any of the characters. And at the end, where was Blanche being taken? Overall, the movie was very confusing and hard to follow, and I had to piece everything together by reading the play afterwards.
The film, A Streetcar Named Desire, was surprisingly congruous with the play, in my opinion. Most adapted movies that I’ve seen edit or completely change up a lot of the dialogue, and sometimes small parts of the plot. With Streetcar, everything seemed to be exactly what I expected from the reading. However, one noticeable change was at the very end: in the play, the last line is Steve’s, when he says “This game is seven-card stud”; in the movie, it ends with Stanley shouting Stella’s name, obviously wanting her to come back. I was confused by the play’s ending; I’m not sure whether Steve’s line has any meaning, or if it’s meaningless, but the movie’s ending made more sense. Also, from the film, I got a better sense of Blanche’s character more-so than anyone else’s. Being able to see her facial expression and watch her reactions towards the other characters emphasized her role as a borderline crazy harlot. Before watching the film, it was somewhat hard to tell who was the crazy one between her and Stella; at least up until the very end. Actually, Stella didn’t necessarily come off as crazy, per se, but just the fact that she took so long to act accordingly towards her sister made me wonder what she was up to. Overall, I was impressed with the film simply because there was not much left to be desired after reading the play. Mostly everything was kept exactly the same, and it made for a decent movie.
The film started out a little different from the book. In that the meeting of the sister was a little different. I guess it was more practical for her to meet her at the bowling alley instead of waiting for her alone in the house. The film showed Blanche as having a lot of sex appeal and also very nervous as if she had something to hide. Stanley seem very determined, had strong leadership qualities and would get the desired effect that he wants. The community poor but very close and they looked out for one another. Men however seemed to always have the upper hand and got away with beating their wives. The film also highlighted that there were activities for men and activities for women. Stella was very dependent on Stanley and desired to please him always. The film was not much different from the play. Very interesting to watch.
“A Streetcar Named Desire” the film is a good adaptation of the play. I liked the movie a lot although there were some differences from the play. I understood the concept of the play a little more through the film because I am a visual person and saw what the characters where living. I loved how the actors played their parts and thought that Vivien Leigh played Blanche very well. Her acting was believable and thought she took her time and really became Blanche.
There was no confusion in the movie for me until I got to the end of the film. I was confused when Blanche and Stanley begin their altercation and the rape seen was supposed to be shown. In the movie Blanche and Stanley are arguing and Blanche breaks a bottle and threatens Stanley. Stanley then grabs Blanche and the mirror is broken. The next scene proceeds and I only thought a fight was had. If I had not read the play I would not have known that the reason why Stella is sending Blanche away was because Blanche accused Stanley of rape. Although Stella does tell her neighbor that she wouldn’t be able to live with Stanley and Blanche in the same house I didn’t understand why she would be so upset already knowing her husband was abusive.
The play and the film also have a different ending. In the play Stanley and Stella seem to end together. Stella is outside with her son and Stanley comes out to comfort her after Blanche leaves with the nurse and doctor. In the film, Blanche gets into a car and Stella makes a decision to leave Stanley. The book seemed to not have any discovery or recognition from a character but in this film Stella has a discovery and chooses move forward and leave Stanley. This concludes Aristotle’s three aspects of tragedy, which in the play it is not done.
While watching the film “A Streetcar Named Desire” I realized certain changes that were made to the film that slightly took away from some of the play’s themes such as sexuality and even homosexuality. Primarily I noticed that the first scene was altered so that Blanche and Stella reunited in the bowling ally Stanley came from in the play, instead of the apartment. In my opinion, although it was important to see the set visually I believe it took away from the first negative encounter with Blanche and Stanley when she drank his whisky and lied to him saying that she rarely drank when he offered her a drink from the same bottle. Throughout the film I saw that Blanche’s promiscuous character was made to look more like an innocent and naïve woman, which I thought took away from the play’s original theme. Her recollection of her late husband was also altered since homosexuality was never even mentioned. I noted that the play’s intended rape was made to look more like a nonsexual beating which I too considered to be a bad alteration to a classical text. In addition to the rape scene, instead of Blanche receiving all the punishment in the end by being sent to the institution, Stanley was also punished for his actions because his wife left him. While the movie did a good job of putting faces to the characters and life to the scenery, I believe it took away from the play’s underlying themes of sexuality and reality as well. I am a firm believer that the literature is always better than the related film and this just proved to be another example of this belief.
The movie I felt at first was hard to follow the dialect at the beginning of the storyline but as it continued you see Blanche’s character really started to unravel after moving in with her sister Stella and her estrange husband Stanly. Blanche is running away from her past life of having many admires and finally crossing the line in getting involved with a 17 year old which made her end up losing her job but she made herself appear to be so high class and her sister low class and a commoner, Blanche was very obsessed about her looks. I felt bad for Stella trying to keep the peace with her sister and her husband you could feel the energy was very tense and Stanly is as no nonsense kind of guy and would try his hardest to break Blanche and find out her true story of her moving in with them all of a sudden. You could feel at that time the struggle people had to go through it felt hard to handle and when it got to hard the husbands took out their frustrations out on their wives. But threw that Blanche did find her true love (the love she was looking for) Mitch but after he found out about her past he decided not to be involved with her anymore, but you can tell that he still cared about her regardless. I was confused near the end of the story just before Blanche lost her mind after the fight with Stanly about the telegram and how Mitch begged for her forgiveness on standing her up. I did not know what Stanly had done to her prior I did not know if he hit her or yell at her the scene faded and returned to her having to go to the mental institution but the book did provide more information on what Stanly did to her and that he had raped her making her mentally unstable. The play provided more of a detailed description of the story.
Kamrun Nahar
Response #1: Comparing the Movie and Play A Streetcar Named Desire.
Movies that are made based on books and plays usually turn out to be very different from our expectations of the written literature, sometimes even cutting out major scenes due to the time constraint faced while making a movie. However, to my surprise, the movie version of A Streetcar Named Desire followed a very similar structure of the written play making only a few changes in the story. I have also noticed that the screenwriter made sure to keep the script of the movie almost identical to the written play. In general, both the director and the screenwriter did a wonderful job in keeping the originality of the play in the movie with a few exceptions made. For this reason I can say I truly enjoyed reading and watching the play A Streetcar Named Desire by Tennessee Williams.
The characters in the movie were depicted as strongly as I have imagined while reading the play. However I felt that Stella was shown as a more aggressive character in the movie than she was portrayed in the literature. For instance, in the movie Stella screamed and pushed and shoved Stanley around a lot more in comparison to her character in the written play. But just like the literature, the film was able to present and keep Stella’s subservient and compliant personality that is crucial in the play. Another observation I made was the small difference in Stanley’s character in the film. Stanley’s sexuality is highlighted more throughout the entire film. He is depicted as a very masculine man. For instance, the director openly presents Stanley in many scenes wearing very tight muscle tees that show his build, or he is shown sweating and at times even shirtless.
One disappointment I came across while watching the movie was the rape scene. In the literature I pictured that scene more vividly as Stanley aggressively handles Blanche and picks her up and carries her to bed against her will after she tries to twist the broken bottle in Stanley’s face in defense. In contrast, the film presents that scene differently. Instead of showing what happens after Stanley grabs Blanche as she tries to hit him with the broken bottle end, the director cuts the scene out. But what intrigues me is the scene right after the deleted rape scene, which shows someone releasing water from a hose at full speed, which can be symbolic in many ways since it comes right after the rape scene. The way I interpreted it was that it confirmed the rape that happened between Stanley and Blanche without the director having to show the scene explicitly.
Because of the time period the movie was shot in, I understand why the director was unable to portray the rape scene in more details. It is because of this same reason, due to the time period and people’s view on certain subjects, I believe that the director purposefully chose to leave out the fact that Blanche’s first husband shared a homosexual relationship. However I wish there was a way he could have included that part in the movie because I feel that fact about Blanche is crucial in explaining why she is the way she is around people and especially men.
Besides these few differences, the director and the screenwriter has done a superb job in being able to display the characters and the storyline of the play A Streetcar Named Desire as Tennessee Williams intended for his audience. The film was able to successfully show Blanche and her representation of the south. As she came to the Elysian Fields in New Orleans, the audience was able to see how she slowly started to lose a hold of her memories of the south and that part of herself. The way the director kept the set very crowded and small, it helped to visualize how Blanche clearly felt trapped towards the end of the movie as if she was trapped in a jungle.
Denise Villanueva
CORE 3104: Literature and Film
Prof. Martin Cloutier
February 3, 2013
A Streetcar Named Desire (film). Talk about your impressions, ideas, confusions, how it is different from the play, etc..
The movie, A Streetcar Named Desire came out in 1951. The actors for the play were, Brando as Stanley, Kim Hunter as Stella, Karl Malden as Mitch, and Vivian Lee as Blanche DuBois. The actors brought their characters from the script to life in the movie. Blanche was a very fragile character that caught my interest from the beginning of the movie. I was curious to why Blanche who seems like a high-class lady was doing in a place like New Orleans? The audience later finds out that she wasn’t really visiting her sister. It could have been the case, but I feel that the stronger reason of her visit was because she had lost everything. All she took with her was her trunk full of documents, jewelry and clothes. She had nowhere else to go. Blanche was left alone with no relatives but her sister’s. Blanche took a huge risk by lying to people as she stayed in her sisters home. The idea that I think Blanche should have had was starting a new life in New Orleans. However, she dragged the past with her in which it practically haunted her.
Blanche lied to everyone with ease, which scared me a bit. She complained to Stella about the neighborhood she was living was awful. Blanche told Stella her opinion of Stanley, her husband. Blanche told her she could do better. Blanche was like a snake, slithering around and hissing her creative lies as if they were reality. In one of the scenes, Stanley just returns from the hospital leaving Stella at the hospital because she is going to give birth soon. Stanley finds Blanche, drunk in his apartment. She tells him that Shep Huntleigh is now a millionaire and that Mitch went to find her to say that he was sorry. Stanley knew that she was lying because he knew where Mitch was. They got into a loud argument and Blanche tries to escape out the front door. Stanley doesn’t let her and throws her across the room. In my astonishment, Blanche grabs a bottle and smashes it on the table. She points the bottle towards his direction. Stanley isn’t afraid and grabs her by the arms and forcefully rapes Blanche. She will do anything to try to get things going her way. My impression for this scene was how insane Blanche was. She had mental issues and she needed help quick.
The ending surprised me because two main turning points happened. In my surprise Blanche didn’t leave in her own will. At first, she was forcefully grabbed by these two people that we find out are nurses. Later, she gave in as the doctor approached Blanche in a gentle manner and convinces her to leave with him. Blanche allows the doctor to lead her out the door without turning back. The second turning point was with Stella. She was awfully mad at Stanley for letting them take Blanche. In the last scene, Stella grabs the baby and goes to Eunice apartment for protection from her violent husband. I was proud of Stella because in the beginning of the movie she was like a doormat until the end.
I read the book first and then I watched the movie. Honestly, while reading the book my negative feelings about Blanche were raising scene after scene. However, the movie changed them completely in the opposite direction. After the movie I felt bad for her and was somewhat on her side. Maybe it was due to the actress who played the role of Blanch, she seemed so lonely and unprotected, so pretty but so unhappy. She always lived in fear of Stanley, in fear that her past will be exposed, in fear that she will she will not find the ability to change herself and start an absolutely new different life. There were also some differences between the movie and the play. From the very beginning we already see the difference in the location and the people that first appear to us. In the movie the action starts in the New Orleans central station where Blanche is the first character that is introduced to the audience. Whereas, in the play, brutal man “roughly dressed in blue denim work clothes”, Stanley opens up the story. In addition, when Blanche arrives to Elysian Fields, Eunice invites her to the house where Stella and her husband live and goes to the bowling alley to call for Stella. On the contrary, in the movie, Blanche goes to the bowling alley herself and meets her sister there. Another difference in the location is when Blanche decided to tell the story about her husband to Mitch. Originally, it happened in the house while Stella and Mitch were out somewhere. Whereas, in the movie, Blanch and Mitch were in front of the casino similar to the place where her husband shot himself. The third difference that I noticed is that Elia Kazan added the scenario where Stanley told his friend Mitch about Blanche’s shady past. It happened in the factory where they both work. In the play, Stanley mentions to Stella about it as just a fact, it is not explained how and where exactly he did it.
The movie A Streetcar Named Desire made me feel so contradictable. It’s a drama of life. Main character Blanche changed several times during this movie and changed my whole view on the picture. From the beginning I felt that she is a negative hero because you can feel her falsehood all the time. But soon after, I started to see lots of pain in Blanche, when all the details came out from the movie, how she lost her loved one when she was so young and her life went to the wrong direction. Finally, when all story opened up about Blanche’s past, viewer of the picture may see her as demented dirty person, but she is not, she is only another lost soul.
This is the story of young lady who were thin and vulnerable in her nature. She met too much tragedy in her life and when stayed alone and been too young, inexperienced, without any advice or close soul right next to her, she lost her way. This is an old movie but tragedy of Blanche’s life can be transferred to any time. So many details covered in this movie, such as prostitution accepted, Blanche’s love did suicide by gun, and student-teacher sexual relations which show even more the tragedy of that time with an accent to Blanche’s life. All the details only prove that Blanche alone in this world tried to survive her own way, as she learned it and could do at that dark time of her life. Her sister Stella and Stanley Kowalski (sister’s husband) like 2 sides of the coin. Stella feels her sister pain and understand that with all negative aspects of Blanche’s life it is not her fault completely, she knew her sister before all the bad happened to her and understand that in all circumstances this was a result. In contrast Stanley hates Blanche and looks at her as a man can look at a prostitute or a woman with low principles in her life. Both Stanley and Stella add negative and positive details to Blanche’s character which make this movie even more dramatic.
To my own opinion: one could say about woman, who had a lot of men in her life, that she has no principles, but another can look at her and say that she didn’t met right one.
To compare the movie with the play I noticed few differences. First, in the beginning of the Play Blanche been invited to Stella’s place and she was waiting for her sister there, where in the movie she went to the bowling place where Stanley played with his friends. Overall, everything been same as play, but scene where Stanley raped Blanche, it was also interpreted by me differently. I watched the movie first, and from the movie I didn’t realize he raped her, before I read the book. Broken mirror to me were interpreted as something broken in whole story, the conflict itself, Blanche’s soul and mind, just as symbol of tragedy, but after I read the book I realized the whole tragedy of the situation. Also, in many scenes, when Blanche had conversations with Stanley, in movie it clearly seemed that she flirts with him, but from the book you don’t see it much.
Yelena v kobzar
I strongly believe that Epiphany was better portrayed in the actual movie. The part where I believe it was best portrayed was when Enis found out about Jack`s death. It was kind of like, That’s all folks. He realized that he would never be able to hold or love him any more. It was sad because Enis really wanted to be with Jack but tried to hide his emotions and didn’t take jack on his offer of moving with him. He realized he was never going to love another man like he did jack. In the book, I didn’t feel the love between Enis and jack as I did in the film. The film did add quite a bit to make it a bit more entertaining.
Film and Literature 
After reading ‘The streetcar named desire’, the movie seemed identical. As it went on there were minor changes that I noticed. The one that stood out to me the most was the story about Blanche’s lover. I interpreted it differently in the reading and I wonder if this subject was too scandalous at the time for a play, so it had to be changed. I do think this part was very interesting and was sad to see it go. It seemed to lack the same meaning and importance. Another part that stood out to me that wasn’t necessarily different from the reading was the scene where Blanche is being taken away by the doctor. This scene was so much more powerful being able to see it. You were able to capture all her emotion, confusion, and uncertainty. In the end it seems that Stella is aware of what her husband Stanley has done to Blanche, which does not seem evident in the reading. She says she is never going back to Stanley and runs upstairs to her neighbors apartment. Although she seemed weak to him before, there seems to be a change in their dynamic as a couple. I thoroughly enjoyed the play and movie and think they complimented each other very nicely. The actors couldn’t have don’t a better job at depicting their characters.
The film for the most part did follow the same script that was written by Tennessee Williams. The few changes that they did make though did not change the plot and the overall events of the story by much. Some of them I did not like such as how they started the movie. Instead of showing how Stanley and Stella are normally they showed Blanche asking for directions. This could have been done to help explain the importance of the names of the Streetcars and the street where they live and also shows how helpless Blanche really is.
It was also interesting in how they talked about Blanche’s deceased husband. While it was it was heavily inferred that he was having an affair with an older man it was not mentioned in the film. She only described him as a weak man who was unable to do anything. This probably was done because during this time homosexuality was an intensely taboo subject that people would not bring up. Even the scenes of violence against either Stella or Blanche were never actually shown. We only heard Stella being hurt and the only a broken mirror was shown. This could also have been used to symbolize the breaking of her mind and soul.
One of the glaring differences though was how they ended the film. Instead of Stella finding comfort in Stanley’s arms she initiated a new found strength in leaving him. I thought this felt awkward. While he was abusive it never seemed like she was going to leave. They do imply that people accuse him of the rape but it seems slightly off since Blanche was so traumatized by it that she repressed the memory of it. This creates an even more tragic ending than it originally had.
The director generally kept to the script in terms of dialogue and only shortens some scenes down a bit. The use of the poker music was also kept throughout within the proper context. One major difference was with the amount of locations that the movie used. Unlike a stage where a director is limited to space the movie embraced different locations. For instance the opening scene in the movie shows Blanche coming out of the train station and finding her way to Stella’s flat by way of “a street car named Desire.” However in the play the opening scene starts with Stanley and Mitch entering toward the Kowalski flat. The movie also showcases the bowling alley which, although spoken about in the play several times, is never seen.
The biggest difference that I noticed had to do with the contents of Blanche’s late husbands demise. In the movie she explains that he never worked and couldn’t support the family and because of that she lost all respect for him and the revelation of this information drove him to suicide. ON the contrary the play reveals that Allen was a secret homosexual who Blanche caught in bed with his best friend. This is the information that disgusted her and the shame that she enforced on Allen ultimately drove him suck on a revolver. I believe that the director chose to eliminate this fact from the film specifically because at the time homosexuality was not a topic that was discussed freely, and considering that a movie can be seen by an endless supply of people the topic would be too controversial to express.
A streetcar named desire, in this movie the director Elia Kazan portrays the unstable life of a mid-aged single woman through Blanche’s character who is depressed and lonely. Blanche lost her young husband when they both were young. Then her father passed away who was in a huge amount of debt and the creditors had to seize all of his property to get their money. And Blanche had no other place to live. She moved in a hotel room. Although she was teaching in a high school as an English teacher but she became depressed and lonely after losing her beloved family, so she quit the job. Since she was lonely she started seeing many men to overcome her loneliness and tried to find her late husband through those strangers. She was trying to find the love from those men as the same way her husband did. But her fate was very unfortunate and she ended up living in that hotel room permanently as the owner of the hotel just used her to bring more customers. Then she went to Mississippi to stay with her sister Stella and her husband Stanley who were living in a dingy apartment. When Blanche met them she discovered that Stanley was from a lower class than her sister, a man with no education, no humanity and benevolence. He was reckless about life, a gambler and abused his wife all time. Stanley was greedy too; he was very impatient to find out what Blanche did with all the properties and asked her to hand him over the papers. When Blanche told Stanley that all the properties were taken away by the creditors, Stanley became very aggressive toward Blanche and started digging her past to find out the truth. Blanche and Stella were born and raised in a rich family; therefore Blanche was dramatic toward life and had a passion for fancy clothes (dancing with the song, paper lantern). But Stanley couldn’t stand Blanche anymore seeing her wearing fancy clothes and living in his apartment while Stella and he were struggling to live their life. Blanche finally found a loving and caring person for her who was also Stanley’s friend Mitch. However, Stanley found out about Blanche’s past life and told everything to Mitch which just didn’t jeopardize the relationship between Blanche and Mitch also created so much hatred. Blanche was very concerned about her age and always tried to hide it (affection of darkness), so she could meet with a younger man than her which might make her feel that she’s spending time with her late young husband. This movie makes us understand the cruel reality of life that once we lose the things we love, we become so lonely and depressed. Then we try different things, sometimes totally new things just to forget about out past which might turn into a disaster and makes our life more miserable and lead one’s life to insanity. In the movie the director didn’t show that who and why they decided to send Blanche to asylum. But in the play it was clear that after Stanley raped Blanche, Stella who decided to send Blanche to the asylum, as a way to bury the whole truth and probably to save Blanche from Stanley’s animosity. An asylum might not be a better place for Blanche but it’ll be at least a safer place where no one could abuse Blanche’s desire for love and turn it into sexual pleasure.
The movie “A Streetcar Named Desire” was a film that kept me on the edge of my seat. When the film first started I said to myself “oh boy, this film seems like its going to put me to sleep.” When Blanche Dubois open her mouth an I heard the accent I figured this should be interesting. The protagonist Blanche first arrived at Elysian field she seem very high class from the way she walked, dressed and carried her self with so much poised.When Blanche arrived , looked around and observed the neighborhood as if she was came to the wrong place. Blanche didn’t expect for her sister to be living in a neighborhood that appears to be ghetto and low class. From just that scene alone, I can tell that Blanche wasn’t pleased that she would staying there during her visit.
One of the scenes in the beginning of the film that confused me is when Blanche first had an conversation with Stanley In the house . The way her eyes caressed Stanley body I felt as if she was admiring him and maybe wanted him. Stanley is profoundly attracted man, especially when is isn’t drunk or behaving like an “animal” as
Miss Blanche would say. One scene in the film where Stellar who is Blanche sister had an physical altercation with Stanley which she is married too , Blanche questioned her reasons for wanting to marry a man like Stanley who is considered to be an “Common” Stanley can be seen most of the time in the film as drunk,angry, and abusive towards stellar who is pregnant by him. Stellar seems to be not disturbed by her husband behavior. Stanley abusive violent ways seem to be a normal thing In the couples marriage.
In the film Blanche appeared to me overly dramatic, she feeds of people complimenting her, and treating her as if she loyalty. Blanche compulsive lies, and delusional ways cheated her out of a man name Mitch who felt for her beautiful lies , an the new person she appeared to be in the new town. Towards the ending of the film i felt bad that Stanley wanted her gone for good. I believed she deserved an second chance to start a new page of her life.
In the movie, A Streetcar Named Desire, I discovered that when Stella & Blanche were talking about the “streetcar named Desire” they weren’t actually speaking of the trolley, but more so the means that had brought them to that point—the course they had taken in their respective lives. How riding the wave of what they longed for—what they’d been yearning, had taken them so far from the life they’d both known. Also that initial interaction between Blanche and Stanley was the exact opposite of what I got from the play. The play built Stanley up to be an ultimate lady-killer, yet the movie portrays Blanche in that scene as literally getting the hots for him. In the play, I thought Stanley had subdued her and she went willingly to bed with him. To the contrary, in the movie Blanche was raped by the brother-in-law.
One thing in the movie that stood out the most for me though –versus in the play, was that I got a much better understanding of exactly how long Blanche’s visit was. In reading the play it seems as though merely a few weeks has elapsed. However, to see the physical changes in Stella throughout the course of her pregnancy really put things into perspective. Upon Blanche’s arrival Stella’s pregnancy wasn’t showing at all—and by the end of the movie the baby boy is not only born, but seems to be at least 1 month old!
Realizing that Blanche had been there during the entire pregnancy and stayed after the child was born; sharing a small flat with one bathroom and no more than a curtain for “privacy”. It’s no wonder there was so much tension. Until this realization I couldn’t understand why Stanley seemed to put so much emphasis on reminding Stella how things were before and about the colored lights. I suppose not being able to live as husband and wife for such an extended time is enough to make ANYone bullish. I was however, surprised at how eagerly Stella returned home after Stanley slapped her. From what I read in the play it seemed to me that maybe Stella went downstairs just to quiet his drunken cries. In the movie though, she practically ran down the stairs. I was almost expecting that she may jump into his arms and play that stereotypical battered-wife role (complete with “no…I’m sorry”). Instead something happened between them…and I credit the actors for manifesting this—but whatever connection Stella and Stanley had that I thought was lost when I heard that slap—it drew her back toward him with a mind blowing hunger. I couldn’t believe that he’d just slapped the hell out of her (and wouldn’t it have been worse if the guys didn’t pull him away?) and here she was consumed with lust and practically sexing on the porch.
A Streetcar Named desire is a Nineteen Fifty-One film based on the play by Tennessee Williams. It follows the basic plot of the play but the Motion Picture Production Code, a set of rules that movies of it’s time period needed to follow, led several major elements of the original play being cut from the movie. Most notably the more overt references the play made to Blanche’s sexuality and promiscuity, the homosexuality of Blanche’s ex-husband which led to him killing himself some time before the events of the story, and Stanley’s rape of Blanche at the story’s climax which in the play is made much more implicit. The decisions were made almost entirely to comply with the standards of the movie industry of the Nineteen Fifties. One major artistic difference made to the film was that of the ending, the ending of the movie ends on a slightly happier note with Stella seeming to make the decision to take their child and leave Stanley for good, while in the play whether or not Stella leaves Stanley is left more ambiguous. The happier ending was made to please the broader audience a film reaches than a play especially after the tragedy of Blanche’s character. The difference’s in the movie compared to the play leave the impression that Stanley is less of a monster, though he is still an angry violent man who causes great emotional and physical harm to the two women in his life, his wife Stella and her sister Blanche. It is thus fitting that he is left alone without his wife or child at the end of the movie.
When I saw the movie some of my opinions about the characters changed. Because when I was reading the book I was building my impression about characters on their dialogues and authors’s description of what was going on and how. But while watching movie I could clearly see how the heroes react,how the look at each other,how they feel.Usually when people read the book first they get dissappointedd with the movie later, because their expectations are not reached. But in this case I can definitely say that I liked the movie a lot and even more than the book.I saw such things which i didn’t notice while reading. For example, I could see how Blanche was looking at men, I could see how Stanley looked at her as well and from the men’s position i understood that he liked her in some way, that’s my point of view. At the same time I saw how strongly Stanley and Stella loved each other. At those moments when they had a conflict, after the fury and alcohol influence went away, they were becoming like two angels together.
The same story reffers to Meith.In the movie I saw how awkward he was indeed and how Blanche was playing with him when he was trying to kiss her.
In general, I saw every scene in the movie from different angle in comparison with the book. And that is what makes movies differ a lot from the books.
I’m wondering, Why the title of the story is “Streetcar Named Desire” I know there is an actual car named “Desire” in the story, the car that Blanche arrived to Elysian Fields in. It seems to be a metaphorical meaning somewhere in the story.
In the Book, Blanche seems a lot more confident when it came to handling Stanley’s negative attitude towards her as oppose to the fearing him in the movie.
In the beginning of the movie, Blanche went to the Bowling Alley to look for Stella, however; in the book, it was the Colored Woman who went and gets Stella. Another difference between the movie and the book is when Blanche went into the house in the first scene of the book. She had a drink of whisky before Stella arrived at the house and had a total of 3 glasses before Stella put it away. In the movie, she had only 2 glass assuming Stella would see her as a drunk.
I’ve seen this movie back in High School and for some reason, now that I’m older and watching and reading with different eyes, I feel more depressing. Blanche is so judgmental, yet so helpless.
I was very excited to watch the film adaptation of “A StreetCar Named Desire” because the play was so interesting and painted a clear image in my mind. In my head, I knew what all of the characters looked like and what the setting looked like as well. I have to say that there were certain aspects of the movie that did not match up to the image in my mind, but for the most part it did. Blanche, Stanley, Eunice, Steve, and the flat were depicted just as how i imagined it but Stella and the minor characters were slightly different. It is always interesting watching old films because the style of acting is much quicker and more emotionally dramatic in my opinion. In recent times, films are extremely graphic and physically disturbing and I think that we lost some of the old fashioned dramatics that A Street Car has because we think that we can make up for it by all of the dynamic special effects. One thing that bothered me was the difference in the ending. In the play, it does not specifically state that Stella leaves Stanley, but in the film she clearly has had enough of him. I am curious as to why the ending was changed, but I think it may be related to the historical context and the uprising of women’s rights. I enjoyed both the play and the film, but the play left more to the imagination and I always enjoy that more in a book.
My initial thoughts when watching the film were that the film was staying very true to the play. This is something you don’t see to often anymore with adaptions. I noticed very few deviations with the exception of where some of the scenes took place. If I’m not mistaken the entire play takes place in Stella and Stanley’s apartment but, in the film some scenes are moved into different locations. I.e Blanche and Stella meet at the apt not the bowling alley, and a scene in which Blanche and Mitch are on a date while in the play the interaction occurs after the date back at the apartment.
I assume some of the scene changes were implemented to give a change of scenery to the viewer and in some situations to make the scene a little less race considering the film was released in the 50’s. There were a few things in the film that had me confused and thinking about why would they change this, or that. I have come to the conclusion that most of it was probably censorship. I noticed that Stella never appears to be pregnant throughout the movie even though she delivers the baby nearing the end of the film. Another difference that I spotted were the events that lead to Blanches young husbands death. In the film she just says that on the dance floor she told her husband ” you’re weak, I’ve lost respect for you, I despise you”. In the play she had discovered her husband in what appears to be in a homosexual relationship with an older man and later tells her husband that she had seen everything and that he disgusts her.
The last major difference that I recall is the second to last scene, the altercation between Stanley and Blanche after Stanley returns from the hospital. The scenes are identical until the very end. In the play it is implied that Blanche is raped by Stanley but in the film he appears to physically assault her. Although there were minor deviations in the film many of which are do to the time the film was released I feel it is a fantastic adaption of the play and captured Tennessee Williams vision quite well.
For the most part, I thought the film did a great job depicting what happened in the play. The actors were perfectly chosen and the acting was phenomenal by everyone. This was the second movie that I’ve seen which starred Marlon Brando (Godfather was the first). To me, his acting is just at another level. I believe all actors in the movie played their roles quite well and accurate do that of the play.
However, there were a few parts that didn’t transfer over well from the play to the movie. Not all movies usually cover everything from the original books (if there are any original books), but this one was a bit different. I noticed a few things that were not depicted in the movie. The first was when Blanche mentioned her husband was a homosexual. I don’t recall seeing that or hearing much about it in the movie. She does mention that he shot himself when she stated that she was disgusted but I didn’t see her tell the full story. The second thing that I noticed which was extremely downplayed in the movie was the rape scene. It seemed like something that was very important in the book but was not really mentioned or shown much of in the movie.
Other than these few things, I thought the movie was great and deserved all the great reviews it has gotten. Is it something I would want to watch again in the future? I doubt it, but it was a fun movie to watch.
The movie A Streetcar Named Desire was surprisingly very similar to the book by Tennessee Williams. There were some differences like the beginning of the book was different than how the movie started with Stanley and the slight script changes. I think that because this was a play, the film was so similar. I usually hate movies that are recreated after a book. They change around so many things, that the image you had of the story while you were reading is completely different from what you watch at the movies. I think that the scene where Stanley rapes Blanche was a little ambiguous. But I think the reason for that was because this was an old play and showing too much might have inappropriate. I think they did a very good job portraying Blanche the way they did. She played the part perfectly. While I was watching the movie, she fit the picture of her i had created while i was reading the play. Stanley also played his manly vulgar part well. Stella was also a perfect fit, she was the quiet, sweet, younger sister who was always there for her older sister Blanche. Overall, I liked the film a lot because of how similar it was to the play.
Streetcar Named Desire movie by Elia Kazan, a movie based on Tennessee Williams’ book, is directly related to the book. Sometimes a movie based on some book does not correlate with the book itself or partly correlates with it. Whereas, this film was put strictly by the play of Tennessee Williams’ – word to word. I enjoyed the movie, however, when I imagined Stanley would play someone rougher and more primitive than Marlon Brando. I remember a scene when Stanley (Marlon Brando) eats meet using his hands – I could see how uncomfortable he was. I think a role of an intelligent, mannerly guy suits Marlon better. In addition, I imagined Stella as someone more sensitive and weaker than Kim Hunter. I think the role she plays in this movie does not really suit her, as I think she represents a strong type of women. I also wish that the movie was not black and white…
The film, like the book, is based on Aristotelian drama rules. It has almost all its elements: the plot, the character, the thought, the diction, the melody, and the spectacle. It definitely has the plot, the story. The character in Aristotelian drama has essential quality or nature that is revealed in the plot. Each character in this movie has four main qualities: good in some way, acts appropriately for his/her gender and station in life, has believable personality, and acts consistently throughout the film. The play has a thought – “where could bring desire”. The movie has diction – the manner the characters speak throughout the play. The film also has songs played few times. The film also definitely has spectacle – costumes of the actors and the scenery – the action takes place in the two-story building.
Overall, I liked A Streetcar Named Desire film by Elia Kazan – I enjoyed watching it and I would recommend watching it to others.
Christina. Radcliffe
In the film a street car named Desire compared to the book their are only few differences. First in the beginning Blanche arrives in New Orleans and finds her sister’s Stella house in New Orleans Elysian Fields to be greeted by her sister land lord Eunice. Now First off in the film I didn’t realize that Eunice owned the building. I also found it strange in the film compared to the book no one Knows that stella sister was coming to visit her. Also Eunice lets Blanche into Stella and stanley’s apartment. Not knowing if she really is stella sister are not and also in movie why would she just go and find her’s sister around the corner in the bowling Alley. Why wasn’t she waiting on Sister there seems to be very strange. I wondered if she new she was coming did come early than expected or what. In the book she waits on sister Stella to come to her instead her which makes more since to me, I wonder to myself why they change that part in the film it made more since. Also with that why didn’t they include the black singers and black people in the Film was it because of the time of the making of the movie was it budget cuts or something. I also wondered Why they never came out and just rather are not was Blanche a postitiute or what. Was she sleeping with military guys to.
Another thing I would like to add I watched the film first before I read the book. I didn’t understand why they didn’t explain why or how she lost her families home. In the film I wondered what happen she never shows paper’s or proof what happen and in the book explanation for all loans that was against the property and what truly happen. Its strange to me also hows she speaks of things she seemed crazy to me in the book but not in the film. Regardless where your from people didn’t speak. Stella even thinks at time she thinks Blanche thought she was talking strange and crazy at times. I can’t believe in the book she doesn’t believe her sister because in film she completely crazy afterwards stella comes home after having the baby that something had clearly happen between Blanche and Stanley. Also what I didn’t understand what Blanche meant. Scene 6 page 104 When Blanche says where going to be Bohemian and pretend that we are sitting in a little artists cafe on the left bank of paris. Now is Bohemian the right word for that ?.
Yes. Bohemian in the sense of living an unconventional lifestyle. It is often used to refer to artists or people living on the fringe of society. Around the turn of the 20th century, the left bank of Paris was a refuge for artists of all descriptions. See La Boheme, the opera on which the musical Rent is based.
I feel like the film, A Streetcar Name Desire was stray forward, no room for the audience to get lost or feel confused. Through out the film I just felt pity of Stella. Stella just wanted to live a happy life but instead she got a delusional sister and an insecure husband. The two sisters came from a wealthy family or at least in a comfortable economy position. One of the sisters for whatever the reason left the family and Blanche stayed. Stella marries Stanley Kowalski a possessive, controlling and with insecurities. There is more to the story line but I’m only going to talk about Stella’s evolution in the film.
The first scene between the two sisters relived the dynamic between Stella and Blanche that will play out through out the film. In the bowling scene, we see Blanches unease and in a way disgusted by the place or the world that she entered, witch is Stella’s world, now. As soon as Blanche and Stella seat and Blanche has the opportunity to “calmly” speak to Stella, all Blanche does is accused her Stella for leaving the heavy load of the family’s problems on her (Blanche). I Think Blanche, did it because she wanted to make her feel bad, Stella would feel guilty and in a way manipulate her to be at her service for the time that Blanche will reside at Stella’s home. I feel like Stella was Cinderella. Blanche made herself the dominate one in the sister relationship. I also feel that Blanche was jealous of her sister because she has what she wants, a relationship with a man and youth.
Stanley Kowalski, had an economic class insecurity. I feel like Stanley was afraid that Stella thought of him as being below her, she came from money and he didn’t, even though that the family became broke. Reason why he was very dominate and made sure that Stella new who was in charge. He would use his powerful voice and body to visually demonstrate that. Especially when he’ll get his ramp rage and start throwing things and start yelling at Stella and Blanche. In the scenes where he hit Stella and when he raped Blanche was all about letting them know that he was the one with the power.
Streetcar Named Desire: What was different from the book and the film? The difference for me was tone. As in any book the reader creates the characters, the dialogue is read and the tone and character dynamic is created in the readers own eye. As I read the book, I felt sorry for the Blanche’s character. I felt her story was a cover yet recognized her love and concern for her sister as something that was real and genuine. I read Stella as a bit of an enabler for both her sister and her husband. I read Stanley as being overly indulgent and self-righteous in his actions. Although the sister in law was annoying she did little to harm him. The book read more pure and I was able to understand the characters from my own perspective and experience.
I didn’t feel the same way watching the film. I felt the director and creative team had stripped away my personal perspectives and pushed these characters hard and fast in one direction. No one really changed or evolved they came in strong and ended just as strong. Blanche’s character was so blatantly annoying that it distracted the viewer from developing any sort of connection with her. Her bourgeois attitude and flaunting of stature and so called class was difficult to stomach. Her fishing for compliments and over acting was a definite turn off. Instead I felt myself more inclined to side with Stanley’s character as the movie made it seem that his actions came from a truer and more sincere perspective. But to put that thought to the side, I want to comment on the casting. I believe that casting Marlon Brando in this film was brilliance. His good looks and tight shirts overshadowed any real chance the film had as an exposé on woman. I go back to my other essay about how the book for me was a commentary on the distinction of acceptance and giving in to the cards one is dealt and living in a fantasy world. How could one notice co-dependent relationship between Stella and her husband when the violent and abusive husband is Marlon Brando. As a woman viewer I am naturally inclined to like him, regardless of his blowhard actions. The Blanche character was made to look a bit weathered and all the make-up and clothes did little to support the persona that I interpreted in the book. They instead cast doubt from the moment the film began instead of allowing the tragedy to build and follow unity of action. In this relationship the movement from book to film, I like the book better.
A lot of disconnects because it seems as though the viewer has to assume what’s going on, that is, if the viewer has never read the play. The movie lacks cohesion because of this, and the lack of cohesion creates confusion on what the clear theme of the story is. The movie was hard to follow and the actors didn’t really seem like they were acting but more like they were given their scripts and they were reading it for the first time. The movie doesn’t do a good job of delivering the descriptions of the scenes, and a lot of the back story that’s given in the play for the viewer to fully understand the story if they were to have never read the play. Some of the locations are different and some of the dialogue is placed in different scenes, or order, in the movie when compared to the movie.
At first the theme of the story seemed like it had something to do with domestic violence or some sort of family dispute, it seemed like it was all over the place in the movie. When the movie ended, it still wasn’t clear to me what the core of the story was really about. The movie was very upsetting as well because there wasn’t anything to connect with and couldn’t develop any type of affection towards any of the characters. And at the end, where was Blanche being taken? Overall, the movie was very confusing and hard to follow, and I had to piece everything together by reading the play afterwards.
The film, A Streetcar Named Desire, was surprisingly congruous with the play, in my opinion. Most adapted movies that I’ve seen edit or completely change up a lot of the dialogue, and sometimes small parts of the plot. With Streetcar, everything seemed to be exactly what I expected from the reading. However, one noticeable change was at the very end: in the play, the last line is Steve’s, when he says “This game is seven-card stud”; in the movie, it ends with Stanley shouting Stella’s name, obviously wanting her to come back. I was confused by the play’s ending; I’m not sure whether Steve’s line has any meaning, or if it’s meaningless, but the movie’s ending made more sense. Also, from the film, I got a better sense of Blanche’s character more-so than anyone else’s. Being able to see her facial expression and watch her reactions towards the other characters emphasized her role as a borderline crazy harlot. Before watching the film, it was somewhat hard to tell who was the crazy one between her and Stella; at least up until the very end. Actually, Stella didn’t necessarily come off as crazy, per se, but just the fact that she took so long to act accordingly towards her sister made me wonder what she was up to. Overall, I was impressed with the film simply because there was not much left to be desired after reading the play. Mostly everything was kept exactly the same, and it made for a decent movie.
The film started out a little different from the book. In that the meeting of the sister was a little different. I guess it was more practical for her to meet her at the bowling alley instead of waiting for her alone in the house. The film showed Blanche as having a lot of sex appeal and also very nervous as if she had something to hide. Stanley seem very determined, had strong leadership qualities and would get the desired effect that he wants. The community poor but very close and they looked out for one another. Men however seemed to always have the upper hand and got away with beating their wives. The film also highlighted that there were activities for men and activities for women. Stella was very dependent on Stanley and desired to please him always. The film was not much different from the play. Very interesting to watch.
“A Streetcar Named Desire” the film is a good adaptation of the play. I liked the movie a lot although there were some differences from the play. I understood the concept of the play a little more through the film because I am a visual person and saw what the characters where living. I loved how the actors played their parts and thought that Vivien Leigh played Blanche very well. Her acting was believable and thought she took her time and really became Blanche.
There was no confusion in the movie for me until I got to the end of the film. I was confused when Blanche and Stanley begin their altercation and the rape seen was supposed to be shown. In the movie Blanche and Stanley are arguing and Blanche breaks a bottle and threatens Stanley. Stanley then grabs Blanche and the mirror is broken. The next scene proceeds and I only thought a fight was had. If I had not read the play I would not have known that the reason why Stella is sending Blanche away was because Blanche accused Stanley of rape. Although Stella does tell her neighbor that she wouldn’t be able to live with Stanley and Blanche in the same house I didn’t understand why she would be so upset already knowing her husband was abusive.
The play and the film also have a different ending. In the play Stanley and Stella seem to end together. Stella is outside with her son and Stanley comes out to comfort her after Blanche leaves with the nurse and doctor. In the film, Blanche gets into a car and Stella makes a decision to leave Stanley. The book seemed to not have any discovery or recognition from a character but in this film Stella has a discovery and chooses move forward and leave Stanley. This concludes Aristotle’s three aspects of tragedy, which in the play it is not done.
While watching the film “A Streetcar Named Desire” I realized certain changes that were made to the film that slightly took away from some of the play’s themes such as sexuality and even homosexuality. Primarily I noticed that the first scene was altered so that Blanche and Stella reunited in the bowling ally Stanley came from in the play, instead of the apartment. In my opinion, although it was important to see the set visually I believe it took away from the first negative encounter with Blanche and Stanley when she drank his whisky and lied to him saying that she rarely drank when he offered her a drink from the same bottle. Throughout the film I saw that Blanche’s promiscuous character was made to look more like an innocent and naïve woman, which I thought took away from the play’s original theme. Her recollection of her late husband was also altered since homosexuality was never even mentioned. I noted that the play’s intended rape was made to look more like a nonsexual beating which I too considered to be a bad alteration to a classical text. In addition to the rape scene, instead of Blanche receiving all the punishment in the end by being sent to the institution, Stanley was also punished for his actions because his wife left him. While the movie did a good job of putting faces to the characters and life to the scenery, I believe it took away from the play’s underlying themes of sexuality and reality as well. I am a firm believer that the literature is always better than the related film and this just proved to be another example of this belief.
The movie I felt at first was hard to follow the dialect at the beginning of the storyline but as it continued you see Blanche’s character really started to unravel after moving in with her sister Stella and her estrange husband Stanly. Blanche is running away from her past life of having many admires and finally crossing the line in getting involved with a 17 year old which made her end up losing her job but she made herself appear to be so high class and her sister low class and a commoner, Blanche was very obsessed about her looks. I felt bad for Stella trying to keep the peace with her sister and her husband you could feel the energy was very tense and Stanly is as no nonsense kind of guy and would try his hardest to break Blanche and find out her true story of her moving in with them all of a sudden. You could feel at that time the struggle people had to go through it felt hard to handle and when it got to hard the husbands took out their frustrations out on their wives. But threw that Blanche did find her true love (the love she was looking for) Mitch but after he found out about her past he decided not to be involved with her anymore, but you can tell that he still cared about her regardless. I was confused near the end of the story just before Blanche lost her mind after the fight with Stanly about the telegram and how Mitch begged for her forgiveness on standing her up. I did not know what Stanly had done to her prior I did not know if he hit her or yell at her the scene faded and returned to her having to go to the mental institution but the book did provide more information on what Stanly did to her and that he had raped her making her mentally unstable. The play provided more of a detailed description of the story.
Kamrun Nahar
Response #1: Comparing the Movie and Play A Streetcar Named Desire.
Movies that are made based on books and plays usually turn out to be very different from our expectations of the written literature, sometimes even cutting out major scenes due to the time constraint faced while making a movie. However, to my surprise, the movie version of A Streetcar Named Desire followed a very similar structure of the written play making only a few changes in the story. I have also noticed that the screenwriter made sure to keep the script of the movie almost identical to the written play. In general, both the director and the screenwriter did a wonderful job in keeping the originality of the play in the movie with a few exceptions made. For this reason I can say I truly enjoyed reading and watching the play A Streetcar Named Desire by Tennessee Williams.
The characters in the movie were depicted as strongly as I have imagined while reading the play. However I felt that Stella was shown as a more aggressive character in the movie than she was portrayed in the literature. For instance, in the movie Stella screamed and pushed and shoved Stanley around a lot more in comparison to her character in the written play. But just like the literature, the film was able to present and keep Stella’s subservient and compliant personality that is crucial in the play. Another observation I made was the small difference in Stanley’s character in the film. Stanley’s sexuality is highlighted more throughout the entire film. He is depicted as a very masculine man. For instance, the director openly presents Stanley in many scenes wearing very tight muscle tees that show his build, or he is shown sweating and at times even shirtless.
One disappointment I came across while watching the movie was the rape scene. In the literature I pictured that scene more vividly as Stanley aggressively handles Blanche and picks her up and carries her to bed against her will after she tries to twist the broken bottle in Stanley’s face in defense. In contrast, the film presents that scene differently. Instead of showing what happens after Stanley grabs Blanche as she tries to hit him with the broken bottle end, the director cuts the scene out. But what intrigues me is the scene right after the deleted rape scene, which shows someone releasing water from a hose at full speed, which can be symbolic in many ways since it comes right after the rape scene. The way I interpreted it was that it confirmed the rape that happened between Stanley and Blanche without the director having to show the scene explicitly.
Because of the time period the movie was shot in, I understand why the director was unable to portray the rape scene in more details. It is because of this same reason, due to the time period and people’s view on certain subjects, I believe that the director purposefully chose to leave out the fact that Blanche’s first husband shared a homosexual relationship. However I wish there was a way he could have included that part in the movie because I feel that fact about Blanche is crucial in explaining why she is the way she is around people and especially men.
Besides these few differences, the director and the screenwriter has done a superb job in being able to display the characters and the storyline of the play A Streetcar Named Desire as Tennessee Williams intended for his audience. The film was able to successfully show Blanche and her representation of the south. As she came to the Elysian Fields in New Orleans, the audience was able to see how she slowly started to lose a hold of her memories of the south and that part of herself. The way the director kept the set very crowded and small, it helped to visualize how Blanche clearly felt trapped towards the end of the movie as if she was trapped in a jungle.
Denise Villanueva
CORE 3104: Literature and Film
Prof. Martin Cloutier
February 3, 2013
A Streetcar Named Desire (film). Talk about your impressions, ideas, confusions, how it is different from the play, etc..
The movie, A Streetcar Named Desire came out in 1951. The actors for the play were, Brando as Stanley, Kim Hunter as Stella, Karl Malden as Mitch, and Vivian Lee as Blanche DuBois. The actors brought their characters from the script to life in the movie. Blanche was a very fragile character that caught my interest from the beginning of the movie. I was curious to why Blanche who seems like a high-class lady was doing in a place like New Orleans? The audience later finds out that she wasn’t really visiting her sister. It could have been the case, but I feel that the stronger reason of her visit was because she had lost everything. All she took with her was her trunk full of documents, jewelry and clothes. She had nowhere else to go. Blanche was left alone with no relatives but her sister’s. Blanche took a huge risk by lying to people as she stayed in her sisters home. The idea that I think Blanche should have had was starting a new life in New Orleans. However, she dragged the past with her in which it practically haunted her.
Blanche lied to everyone with ease, which scared me a bit. She complained to Stella about the neighborhood she was living was awful. Blanche told Stella her opinion of Stanley, her husband. Blanche told her she could do better. Blanche was like a snake, slithering around and hissing her creative lies as if they were reality. In one of the scenes, Stanley just returns from the hospital leaving Stella at the hospital because she is going to give birth soon. Stanley finds Blanche, drunk in his apartment. She tells him that Shep Huntleigh is now a millionaire and that Mitch went to find her to say that he was sorry. Stanley knew that she was lying because he knew where Mitch was. They got into a loud argument and Blanche tries to escape out the front door. Stanley doesn’t let her and throws her across the room. In my astonishment, Blanche grabs a bottle and smashes it on the table. She points the bottle towards his direction. Stanley isn’t afraid and grabs her by the arms and forcefully rapes Blanche. She will do anything to try to get things going her way. My impression for this scene was how insane Blanche was. She had mental issues and she needed help quick.
The ending surprised me because two main turning points happened. In my surprise Blanche didn’t leave in her own will. At first, she was forcefully grabbed by these two people that we find out are nurses. Later, she gave in as the doctor approached Blanche in a gentle manner and convinces her to leave with him. Blanche allows the doctor to lead her out the door without turning back. The second turning point was with Stella. She was awfully mad at Stanley for letting them take Blanche. In the last scene, Stella grabs the baby and goes to Eunice apartment for protection from her violent husband. I was proud of Stella because in the beginning of the movie she was like a doormat until the end.
I read the book first and then I watched the movie. Honestly, while reading the book my negative feelings about Blanche were raising scene after scene. However, the movie changed them completely in the opposite direction. After the movie I felt bad for her and was somewhat on her side. Maybe it was due to the actress who played the role of Blanch, she seemed so lonely and unprotected, so pretty but so unhappy. She always lived in fear of Stanley, in fear that her past will be exposed, in fear that she will she will not find the ability to change herself and start an absolutely new different life. There were also some differences between the movie and the play. From the very beginning we already see the difference in the location and the people that first appear to us. In the movie the action starts in the New Orleans central station where Blanche is the first character that is introduced to the audience. Whereas, in the play, brutal man “roughly dressed in blue denim work clothes”, Stanley opens up the story. In addition, when Blanche arrives to Elysian Fields, Eunice invites her to the house where Stella and her husband live and goes to the bowling alley to call for Stella. On the contrary, in the movie, Blanche goes to the bowling alley herself and meets her sister there. Another difference in the location is when Blanche decided to tell the story about her husband to Mitch. Originally, it happened in the house while Stella and Mitch were out somewhere. Whereas, in the movie, Blanch and Mitch were in front of the casino similar to the place where her husband shot himself. The third difference that I noticed is that Elia Kazan added the scenario where Stanley told his friend Mitch about Blanche’s shady past. It happened in the factory where they both work. In the play, Stanley mentions to Stella about it as just a fact, it is not explained how and where exactly he did it.
The movie A Streetcar Named Desire made me feel so contradictable. It’s a drama of life. Main character Blanche changed several times during this movie and changed my whole view on the picture. From the beginning I felt that she is a negative hero because you can feel her falsehood all the time. But soon after, I started to see lots of pain in Blanche, when all the details came out from the movie, how she lost her loved one when she was so young and her life went to the wrong direction. Finally, when all story opened up about Blanche’s past, viewer of the picture may see her as demented dirty person, but she is not, she is only another lost soul.
This is the story of young lady who were thin and vulnerable in her nature. She met too much tragedy in her life and when stayed alone and been too young, inexperienced, without any advice or close soul right next to her, she lost her way. This is an old movie but tragedy of Blanche’s life can be transferred to any time. So many details covered in this movie, such as prostitution accepted, Blanche’s love did suicide by gun, and student-teacher sexual relations which show even more the tragedy of that time with an accent to Blanche’s life. All the details only prove that Blanche alone in this world tried to survive her own way, as she learned it and could do at that dark time of her life. Her sister Stella and Stanley Kowalski (sister’s husband) like 2 sides of the coin. Stella feels her sister pain and understand that with all negative aspects of Blanche’s life it is not her fault completely, she knew her sister before all the bad happened to her and understand that in all circumstances this was a result. In contrast Stanley hates Blanche and looks at her as a man can look at a prostitute or a woman with low principles in her life. Both Stanley and Stella add negative and positive details to Blanche’s character which make this movie even more dramatic.
To my own opinion: one could say about woman, who had a lot of men in her life, that she has no principles, but another can look at her and say that she didn’t met right one.
To compare the movie with the play I noticed few differences. First, in the beginning of the Play Blanche been invited to Stella’s place and she was waiting for her sister there, where in the movie she went to the bowling place where Stanley played with his friends. Overall, everything been same as play, but scene where Stanley raped Blanche, it was also interpreted by me differently. I watched the movie first, and from the movie I didn’t realize he raped her, before I read the book. Broken mirror to me were interpreted as something broken in whole story, the conflict itself, Blanche’s soul and mind, just as symbol of tragedy, but after I read the book I realized the whole tragedy of the situation. Also, in many scenes, when Blanche had conversations with Stanley, in movie it clearly seemed that she flirts with him, but from the book you don’t see it much.
Yelena v kobzar
I strongly believe that Epiphany was better portrayed in the actual movie. The part where I believe it was best portrayed was when Enis found out about Jack`s death. It was kind of like, That’s all folks. He realized that he would never be able to hold or love him any more. It was sad because Enis really wanted to be with Jack but tried to hide his emotions and didn’t take jack on his offer of moving with him. He realized he was never going to love another man like he did jack. In the book, I didn’t feel the love between Enis and jack as I did in the film. The film did add quite a bit to make it a bit more entertaining.