Compare the book to the film with the same name.
The story is about two half-sisters, Laura and Marian, and their art teacher Walter, who solve the mystery of the enigmatic woman, dressed all in white, who Walter met in the beginning. It is divided in three parts.
They find out the woman's name is Anne Catherick, and she warned Laura that she shouldn't marry sir Percival Glyde, claiming he put her in an asylum because she knew a secret that could ruin his reputation.
In the meantime, Walter and Laura got closer and fell in love, but Marian requested Walter to give it up, as Laura was soon getting married. He was heartbroken, but he did as she told him and found a job for which he needed to travel to South America, to try and suppress his thoughts about Laura.
When Walter left, Marian asked Percival to explain his situation with Anne. Percival responded to this calmly, claiming he only did it because she was mad and that he wanted to do a favour to Anne Catherick's mother, and he requested Marian to ask her too, to confirm it. Marian wrote her a letter and she did confirm it as accurate, but she still wasn't satisfied.
From those moments, the story only escalated. When Percival and Laura finally wed, Percival revealed his true side, which was ruder and more ignorant. It was also confirmed he abused Laura when they were back from their honeymoon, and Marian swore she'll avenge her. They also met Percival's friend, who later turned out to be his ally in the wicked business they planned, Count Fosco.
I really liked the ending because Sir Percival got what he deserved and paid for his sins. Apart from him, everyone else was happy and joyful.
The story takes place in Cumberland, the north of England, in the 19th century. It didn't differ much from what I imagined, however, I expected the Limmeridge village to be smaller and less sumptuous.
I imagined Walter to be exactly like in the movie - rather handsome, taller young man. I also liked his character, because he chose to give up Laura when he found out she was marrying someone else instead trying to persuade her to marry him forcefully. He also wanted to save Percival in the church, despite all the evil he did.
Marian was my favourite character. The actress in the film played her amazingly, brave and intelligent as she is. However, I did not imagine her look like she was in the film. When Walter first met her in the book, he described her as 'not at all beautiful', which gave me an impression of a woman who really doesn't care for her looks, and in the film she has her hair bonded and is very beautiful. That may be only due to Walter's type of a woman he likes.
I believe Laura was the 'sacrificial lamb' in the whole story, right next to Anne. She went through very much and I respect her as a person. She was described as a beautiful young lady with long, wavy hair and blue eyes. As for her personality, her sister Marian said she was an angel. Nobody deserves to go through what she did, but I'm glad she was happy in the end.
Sir Percival Glyde was the character I disliked the most. His attitude and behaviour was unforgivable. He was a man in his mid-forties, and he wanted to marry a woman half his age just for the money. Even when he was a villain, he wasn't so smart and only cared for himself.
Count Fosco was a character I did like, however. He was described as a fat man who liked animals as his own children. He especially liked mice. I think his actor in the film nailed it. He was also a villain, an ally of Percival's, but he seemed much more intelligent and much more intimidating than Percival. That is why I liked him. He was collected, and wasn't rash.
There weren't any particular parts left out from the book and the storyline wasn't affected much, but they changed some events. For example, in the book Walter left the two of his students so he could go to South America to clear his head from Laura, but in the film he was accused of undressing a maid named Margaret, which resulted in Laura being mad with him and him leaving the Limmeridge House. In the book, Margaret was a good character who took care of Laura while she was sick.
Another difference I noticed is that, in the film, Laura 'died' due to an accident - falling from a tower of the house. In the book, she fell ill and travelled to London to Count Fosco's house, believing Marian was there too, but she was tricked by Percival and Fosco, and then passed away due to a heart disease.
The reason for these changes may be for the story to be 'spiced up', but I personally don't think it needed anything like that. The other reason also may be because the directors of the film wanted to have a surprise effect on the viewers who read the book.
There is also a chance it might be because the director didn't like that particular event and changed it for something else.
The people who made the film did an awesome job for sure, I liked it, but it differs a lot from the book. A lot of events were changed, however, the end still stayed the same, so I think they did a good job.
I enjoyed the book more because the plot wasn't so abrupt and it wasn't as dramatic as the film. Another thing is that I personally had a hard time understanding the British accent in the film, but even if I could understand it all perfectly, it wouldn't change much of my opinion.
Aleksandra Bajić, VIII1
