The Immortal Life of Henrietta LacksThe Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks by Rebecca Skloot has been one of the most popular books since it was published in 2010 because it told a very complex, but also very compelling story about the life of Henrietta Lacks, a person whose cells have benefited every person alive today. However, the film's director, George C. Wolfe, took some liberties with the film that I believe compromised the integrity of the story Skloot was attempting to tell. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay One of the most noticeable differences between the book and the film was Rebecca Skloot's involvement in the film. Although Skloot was indeed in the book, he tried to keep his personal opinions and emotions out of the book and focus on Henrietta and her family. While I realize that the interactions with Skloot and Deborah along with the rest of his family tell viewers a lot about the family and their characters, Skloot should not have been the main focus of the film. It almost felt like this was a movie about Skloot's journey to write the book and the difficulties he faced researching Henrietta, instead of focusing on Henrietta's life, what happened to her cells, and Henrietta's family. I really think this took away from the real message of the book that Skloot was trying to convey. The film focused significantly on whether it was right or wrong to take Henrietta's cells and what kind of consent there would have to be. However, in the book, Skloot presents it in a complicated way that makes us question the decisions of the doctors who worked at Johns Hopkins, but doesn't see them as completely wrong. The film makes the doctors who worked at Johns Hopkins and the institution in general seem like they are the devil and there is no real issue of consent in a very simple way. All doctors and nurses are described as very condescending, dry and apathetic people. I think this also takes away from the way Skloot wanted the story to be told. There were many other small differences between the book and the film that affected how the story as a whole was interpreted. Skloot spends a lot of time talking about the difficulties Deborah and her siblings faced when their mother died. She explains in detail how their stepmother was very cruel and beat them every day, their father didn't care much about them, how Deborah was sexually abused and much more. However, in the film we only get about 1 minute of flashbacks to these crucial events. I think this really took away the backstory of the family and the difficulties they faced after Henrietta's death, which may have left people who haven't read the book a little confused. Also, a huge turning point in the book was when Deborah finally let Skloot see her mother's papers because that symbolized that Deborah had finally let Skloot in completely, but it didn't feel like a huge turning point in the movie. : This is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay If we overlook some differences from the book, however, and treat the film almost as a separate entity, it is a great film. The acting, especially that of Oprah Winfrey (who played Deborah), was some of the best I've seen in years. I think Oprah's performance was one of his best.