The Body vs Stand By Me - significant differences

[Albie]

The movie Stand by Me had a very different feeling from The Body. I enjoyed both but for entirely diffrerent reasons. The movie was good general entertainment and well done. The nouvella would not be anything I would read or give my children to read.

The movie was bland in that manner but revealed more innocence or what we would hope was innocence.

The book was much more realistic but perhaps more adult than pre-teens were in the early 60's.

The Maine setting in the book was much more appropriate than the Oregon setting. The movie really screwed that up. Too much blue skies - no sweating.

I need to take the time and rewatch the movie and re-read the book. I grew up and was about that age back in that time period. SK is only a couple years older than I. I like the movie as it brought back more memories. I like the book for the depth of character that the movie did ok on but the book excelled at.

So what is everyone take away from these two different medias?

[yankeesboi87]

I liked the book better. The movie was great, don't get me wrong, but the book just blew me away. I couldn't stop reading. It was the best in the whole collection, and I think it is one of King's best stories, of the ones that I have read.

[michal]

I actually think the book is appropriate for children and was no more than a child myself (11 at most) when I read it for the first time. There were simply things I didn't notice or didn't understand, but young readers are used to that.

I'm not sure I agree with "more adult than pre-teens were in the early 60's". You see, when we grow up we sometimes forget how the world was to us as children, and how much we understood of what we saw.

I do, however, totally agree that the book is darker, more real, less polished (not as "less fine", just harsher, and with all the hard corners still poking right at you, making you see them).

[Albie]

I actually think the book is appropriate for children and was no more than a child myself (11 at most) when I read it for the first time. There were simply things I didn't notice or didn't understand, but young readers are used to that.


While I agree with some of the above - specifically the last statement.

I do have a couple of questions.

Did you grow up in the 50's & 60's or earlier?

Do you have children?

The period written about was a more innocent time. For those growing up in the 70's and 80's with the explosion of HBO and the sexual revolution, The Body would seem somewhat acceptable. Note that the story about Chico in the middle of The Body was published in 1970 - ten years after the main story took place. While not pornographic, it is not a story for children. I understand the liberal viewpoint of no censorship even for children that is prevalent but I do not agree with it.

While I began swearing to some extent in early high school, the time period in the book at least where I lived involved pretty terrible repurcussions for foul language especially in regards to childen swearing. There were a lot of "F" words.

Recall this was era just prior to George Carlin and the seven words that can not be said on the air.

As a parent and grandparent I would not want my per-teen children and now my grandchildren reading such a book. I know at 11 I knew what the "F" word was and I was also taught it was not a "Nice" word. I also learned that words spoken so often becomes words of habit without thought and will likely be used around adults. As children of the late 50's, pre-teen peers were shocked when compatriots used them so I feel the language in the book was over extended where as the film portrayed that better.

[vinividivicci]

While not pornographic, it is not a story for children. I understand the liberal viewpoint of no censorship even for children that is prevalent but I do not agree with it.

While I began swearing to some extent in early high school, the time period in the book at least where I lived involved pretty terrible repurcussions for foul language especially in regards to childen swearing. There were a lot of "F" words.

Recall this was era just prior to George Carlin and the seven words that can not be said on the air.

As a parent and grandparent I would not want my per-teen children and now my grandchildren reading such a book. I know at 11 I knew what the "F" word was and I was also taught it was not a "Nice" word. I also learned that words spoken so often becomes words of habit without thought and will likely be used around adults. As children of the late 50's, pre-teen peers were shocked when compatriots used them so I feel the language in the book was over extended where as the film portrayed that better.

Wow
Yes, I thought there was a lot of underage profanity; however, I got the impression that these kids were largely on their own (one dad drunk, the parents don't talk to one another, etc etc) and in that environment I think kids tend to swear more amongst themselves than around adults (lest they get the crap beat out of them)

at least one of the kids (I forgot his name now) felt like no one expected anything better from him while the narrator was afraid of getting turned in by the shop owner because he got set off about his dead brother, etc.

In short, I think the kids knew what was right and wrong, but buddies in the sanctuary of the "fort" or "camping in the woods" was the point of the story.

The escape from society, where the good kid can do bad things (we still forgive him, and despite what he thinks we know he does them anyway, like smoking), the tough kid can be the most virtuous (and not be called a sissy), and when we really learn about ourselves because we're not pretending or cow-towing to any adults

I don't think there is an expiration date on when someone has to read/see it by.

I do think if a responsible adult doesn't breach the subject at an impressionable age, the kid's friends will be more than happy to fill in the blanks

[Doc Wilson]

Interesting, yall are making me want to re-read the novella. The movie, which I loved, captured me so completely its taken the place of the original story in my memory. I remember it being different than the novella but I don't remember how.

[rev. rick]

the books are almost always better but i still love the movie. I think it was a well done work of art