This is an essay I wrote for my boyfriend to turn in and pull of as his own-
Plagiarism whaaddup

Gomorrah (2008), a film directed by Matteo Garrone, is an adaptation of the novel of the same name, written by Roberto Saviano in 2006. The film is drastically different from most other mobster films that have been made, like Scarface, Casino, The Godfather, etc. Those films glorify men in the mafia, breathe life into them and asign them personalities and heroic qualities that young men viewing the films may look up to, and try to emmulate. Gomorrah, however, is a frightening portrait of the Camorra at its most brutal, holding nothing back. Anyone that views this film in their right mind wouldn’t dare emmulate the heartless characters of the film, but instead feel sadness and sympathy for the men and women stuck in the unforgiving lifestyle of the Camorra. This being said, the film is entirely different from the novel, Gomorrah, which it’s based on, as well. The style, the level of detail and the general plotline of the film are not what a reader would normally envision after finishing the novel, but each greatly contribute to why I prefer Garrone’s adaptation to Saviano’s written work.

The style in which Garrone directed his film is very different from the feel that the novel gives readers. The novel is much slower, narrated in detail by Saviano himself, whereas the film has a fast paced feeling very similar to the popular film, Pulp Fiction. At times, the film even begins to feel like documentary footage; nothing is held back, there is no cushioning- it appears to entirely represent the grittiness of the Camorra in Italy. The film is edgy and raw, exciting to viewers, leaving them to their own devices in attempting to keep up with everything that unfolds. The novel slowly draws readers in with an emotional attachment to the narrator and main character of the story, Roberto Saviano. His narration allows for him to make an intimate connection with readers, helping them feel as if they know him on a personal level, while the film is detatched, making most of the characters feel like faceless victims who will, no doubt, meet a fatal end by the time the two hours are up.
The detailing of the film is also very different from the novel. Saviano clearly poured all of his knowledge and personal experience with the Camorra into his writing, and although some of that did translate to the silver screen, much of it was left behind. Garrone’s account of Saviano’s stories is much more brief, but that’s only to be expected when a novel can run hundreds of pages, and a film has a limit to how much information can be packed in to a matter of hours. The novel is written in vivid detail and a reader can walk away from it having absorbed a good amount of truth and useful information about the behind-the-scenes of the Camorra and the hardships that come with living in it, being that most of the author’s experiences were first hand. The film barely gives details or names and the degree of truth it carries may be far lighter than that of the novel. In that sense, the novel would be the better choice if a reader or a viewer was looking for an educational experience rather than an entertaining minimized version of things.
The most major difference between the film and the novel is the general plotlines that they individually follow. The novel is narrated by Saviano, therefor he’s with readers every moment along the way, sharing his experiences as he interprets them. He stays very focused, following a more direct timeline, whereas the film is very scattered and follows five interwoven narrative threads. There’s Don Ciro, the timid middleman who distributes money to families of imprisoned clan members, Toto, a pre-pubescent boy who gets caught up in the warfare between families, and of course, there’s Roberto, a graduate working in waste management. There’s also Pasquale, a haute couture tailor who betrays his own company for extra money on the side, and Marco and Sweet Pea, two cocky young men looking to operate their own independent clan. Roberto Saviano is barely featured in the film, in fact he’s the least featured out of any character. Removing his character almost entirely really makes room for the viewers, and puts them in the midst of everything, feeling as if they’ve experienced it first hand, just as Saviano did in the novel.
With the differences between the film and the novel being the style in which they were written and directed, the level of detail and truth they each have to offer and the characters and stories they present to viewers and readers, I prefer the film to the novel. Garrone’s adaptation is much darker, more heartpounding and resonating, leaving viewers feeling as if they never even stood a chance in getting to know the heroes or the villains before they met such foul ends. Saviano’s novel is much more fact based, and at times it begins to drone on and feel like a news broadcast. Altough I would recommend both the novel and the film, the film is much more exciting and entertaining.