“Guys like us, that work on ranches, are the loneliest guys in the world.”(13) The quote is from George, a protagonist, in John Steinbeck’s best selling novel Of Mice and Men written in 1937, during the Great Depression. The book tells the story of two migrant ranch workers George Milton and Lennie Small. George, a short but shrewd guy takes care of Lennie, a huge but mentally disabled man. Unlike others of the time, the two always stay with each other, traveling together wherever they go. One day, the two run away from their workplace due to Lennie’s mistake of touching a woman’s skirt. The woman thinks he is trying to rape her, but this actually arises from his obsession in touching soft things. In their new ranch, they work to be paid by the end of the month so that they can achieve their dream of getting their own piece of land. The film of this masterpiece was created in 1992 by director Gary Sinise. He, in addition to playing a role as a director, acts in the film as the main character, George Milton. In spite of his endeavors for the movie, he unfortunately doesn’t do a good job in comprehending the book’s deeper meanings completely.

To begin with, most importantly, some events are missing from the movie. By reading the novel this is clear; for example, the scene when several people gather in Crooks’s room disappeared. In the book, Lennie, Candy, and Curley’s wife all come together in Crooks’s room when others have gone to town. Crooks, Lennie and Candy have a talk with each other, about the depressing life they have at the moment and the bright future they will have. Curley’s wife, on the other hand, come over and hurt Crooks in the heart by saying racially. However, this crucial scene isn’t portrayed in the movie. Steinbeck, through the novel, especially with this scene, tries to provide a lesson that the weak, women, black, old and the disabled, during the Great Depression couldn’t get along with others. He teaches that the powerless, especially the black, had a lonely, isolated life under discrimination. However, Sinise fails to understand Steinbeck’s deeper meanings of the scene, excluding it from his work. Another example of a missing event is demonstrated in the ending. In the book, after George shoots Lennie in the back of his head, Slim comes over and takes George for a drink. In the movie, unfortunately, this part is missing, not delivering Steinbeck’s idea at all. Originally, after Slim and George head to a bar, Carlson says, “Now what the hell ya suppose is eatin’ them two guys?” This sentence expounds how companionship between two men(laborers) was an odd thing due to certain prejudices of the time. It was a common belief that two men traveling or having a good friendship with each other were homosexuals. This fact is evident when the boss says “I just like to know what your interest is.” after George takes “...so much trouble for...” Lennie.(22) Such prejudice is also obvious when George and Lennie meet Slim. Slim says “It jus’ seems kinda funny a cuckoo like him and a smart little guy like you travelin’ together.”(39) Consequently, as the movie misses significant parts of the book, it is definite that the film is unsuccessful in portraying the book’s original meanings.

In addition to the fact that some significant pieces of the plot are missing, the lack of imagery also demonstrates the film director’s shallow understanding of the book’s hidden ideas. Throughout the novel, animals appear numerous times; they act as Steinbeck’s method of comparison. One major example is the heron and the snake. In the beginning of chapter 1, a heron is introduced. “A stilted heron labored up into the air and pounded down river.”(2) It takes no action until it is re-introduced in the beginning of the last chapter, where it gobbles up a snake. “A silent head and beak lanced down and plucked it out by the head, and the beak swallowed the little snake...”(99) The scene distinctly acts as foreshadowing; the snake symbolizes Lennie, and it being eaten acts as a prediction of his death. Furthermore, Lennie’s hallucination of a bunny refers to the situation during the Great Depression. Lennie’s dream is to get a bunny and tend it. In the last chapter, Lennie is chastised by a rabbit. “...you’re even crazier’n usual. ...He’s gonna beat hell outta you...”(102) This section of the book expounds how the weak during the time period couldn’t achieve their dreams. However, Sinise ignores these two essential examples of imagery and therefore fails to capture the deeper meanings of the novel.

Last but not least, the change of character has an impact on Sinise’s failure. The novel illustrates the boss of the ranch an amiable person who gives out a whole gallon of alcohol to the workers on Christmas day. On the contrary, unlike the portrayal in the novel, the boss appears aggressive and provocative; he shows no manners when he first meets George and Lennie. He constantly frowns and speaks in a sharp, acrimonious way. This transformation of the boss causes an issue since it alters Steinbeck’s intention. By describing the boss a nice man, the author wishes to depict how wealthy and powerful men had serene lives thus had no rationale to be mean and intrusive like normal workers.

Despite these flaws, the film lures audiences with two advantages: performance and reproduction. First off, all actors demonstrate great performances for the acts they were given to fulfill. Most times, the characters have perfect expressions and gestures, entertaining the viewers. The most impressive of all is the scene where Lennie crushes Curley’s hands. When Lennie, with his powerful hands, blasts Curley’s hand, not only does Lennie have a raging expression that scares everyone, but also, the actor playing Curley’s role does an awesome job, giving pain even to the audiences just with his expressions. Moreover, the reproduction of the time setting of the book is impressive. Regarding the fact that the film was created in 1992, it is unbelievable that the setting could be recreated so perfectly. From clothing fashions to automobiles, every single details are exactly like the pictures we see in history textbooks.

Conclusively, although the film was really interesting with amazing performances by the actors and very realistic reproductions of the setting, director Sinise doesn’t succeed in capturing the deeper meanings of the novel in ways of not including the major events, not demonstrating the examples of imagery mentioned in the writing, and changing the character’s traits. In other words, he fails to comprehend Steinbeck’s lessons of social inequality and discrimination during the 20th century.