Fiction vs. Fiction: The Shawshank Redemption

 Stephen King is practically a money factory when it comes to Hollywood.

As such, many many Books and Short Stories have been written for the Screen.

Let's take a look at how a 106-page novella into one of his most beloved adaptations.

***VS***

What's the Same?

The Plot is 100% the same here.
Two Prisoners form a bond, time passes and one of them makes a famous escape.

So...

What's Different?

This is a good example of how you take a Novella and tweak things to a more normal, Film narrative.

For starters, the Casting is a bit different.  Andy is short and wears glasses in the Story.  Red is Irish, so presumably a Ginger.

In the Film, Andy gets in with the main Guard to get the 'Sisters' off of his back (and to break theirs).  In the Book, he takes care of that himself and helps out the current Warden.

The Guards change out quite a bit in the Story, as Andy is imprisoned for 27 years.

He's only in it for 19 in the Film, but I'm not sure why they changed that.

There's also more than one Warden in the Book, which would make sense with the timespan here.  The Film makes it one Warden the whole time for maximum drama.
It is a logical change.

Andy's famous moment of protest with playing the record is NOT in the Book.  He's punished by the Warden just for wanting to get proof of his innocence.

On that note, the Warden has the guy who get Andy acquitted killed off, as opposed to getting them sent to a Minimum-Security Prison in the Book.

Speaking of death, Brooks (the old Librarian) just dies of old age in the Book (stating that they took everything from him), while he actually kills himself in the Film (as he's too used to Prison).

In the Book, Andy explains that he had a friend make a fake identity for him to invest his money in before he was sent to Prison.  Said friend is now dead, making Andy wait to figure out how to pull off the scheme.

In the Film, he uses money made in Prison to set it up.

Andy's escape plays out the same way, though he's got a Linda Ronstadt Poster in the Book.  The Warden retires in shame in the Book, but the Film has him commit suicide to avoid justice.

Lastly, Red complains about normal life and being around women for the first time in 4 Decades on the outside (complaining about being 'half hard all day'), while that part was wisely excised.
The Book is also more ambiguous about the duo meeting, which is what Frank Darabondt wanted too.

Thoughts

The Film makes many obvious changes, focusing the tale more on certain people and consolidating them into one or more people from a dozen.

I do like the original Story and its structure.  It features Red as the sole Narrator and leaves the blanks of Andy's life open until the end.

Either way, it is a good Story.  The Film has great people behind it- including Roger Deakins as Cinematographer- so it is hard to complain much.

Which Is Better?

The Film

Not a knock on the original Story at all, but with a tighter narrative and great production, it really delivers on the potential that the Story promises.

(FYI, I have 'Different Seasons,' so I can easily get at least 2 more King Comparisons out of it)