"Harrison Bergeron," by Kurt Vonnegut, is a story like no other. It is a story based on the possibility of equality; full and true equality as they say. While the short story could have been slightly better considering it takes on such a strong topic, the movie rendition was completely unacceptable. It is a commonly agreed upon statement, that the book is always better than the movie, and this is one of the many cases where this statement shines. The movie, "2081," based on Vonnegut's novel, wasn't as good as the book.
In, "Harrison Bergeron," the characters are lively. It was simple to form a connection with a character; they had an influence on the reader. However, in the movie, the characters seemed stiff and over exaggerated. Also, handicaps were mentioned in the story as the enforcers for the idea of equality. They were described in a way that made it seem like everyone was used to wearing them, and that this was somehow normal. The way they showed Harrison was a threat, was by mentioning that he had the worst handicaps out of everyone in the world. However, in 2081, the handicaps all seemed forced. Harrison’s handicaps made him seem like anyone else. Finally, for a story to succeed it must be good. "Harrison Bergeron," succeeded the way it is, to keep the reader interested. However, it seemed as though the producer of the movie didn’t quite comprehend that as he thought the addition of a bomb, would make audiences more inclined to view it. It seemed as though the producer of the movie, felt the need to change the story.
Throughout the story, the characters were very approachable, and even funny at times. It made it easier to form a connection with the characters. “It was such a doozy that George was white and trembling, and tears stood on the rims of his red eyes.” When you read about a character in pain, it is normal to automatically sympathize towards them, and that is exactly what happens here. However, in 2081, when...