i'm in the process of reading the book right now, so i'll let you know when i get done.
2007-01-15 14:43:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by *KiM* 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I love them both, but I love the book more. The musical is so different because they wanted it to be suitable for young children, and seeing as how you've read the book, you know the book isn't suitable for young children. But they wanted the musical to be like Wizard of Oz in a way, where people of all ages would love it. Thus, they had to completely rewrite the musical from the book. I love them both too, but I still like the book more.
2007-01-15 22:43:53
·
answer #2
·
answered by Jess 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I liked the book better. I read an interview about the author's opinion on the musical and he thought it was great. He didn't care if they took liberties with his book, after all he Say's he took liberties with The Wizard of Oz.
2007-01-16 01:09:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by jason e 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think the writers of the musical did a much better with the story idea than the author of the book did. Their story was more streamlined, I felt the author put too much into his book, it was very rocky.
2007-01-16 13:49:55
·
answer #4
·
answered by BlueManticore 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
They're two completely different entities, just with duplicate titles and characters. It's a shame, really; it could have been great if they'd kept the darkness of the book and not tried to relate it to Wizard of Oz.
2007-01-15 22:46:45
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I liked the book much better. The play had the same characters, but they seemed to have different motives, feelings, etc. They didn't seem like the same people.
2007-01-15 23:11:07
·
answer #6
·
answered by Kelsey 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I read the book and want to see the Musical so bad, I hope u are not saying the musical sucked:(
2007-01-15 22:40:38
·
answer #7
·
answered by chay e 2
·
0⤊
0⤋