Movie vs Book. The differences.


1. The character Shears is not an escapee from the prisoner camp as is depicted in the movie. He is also British not American.

2. The ending and Col.Nicholson's behavior: In the book he shouts for help and attacks Joyce, strangling him. He does NOT say," What have I done?" As he,Joyce and Shears are led away by Japanese soldiers they are hit by a mortar fired by Warden (Walden,?).

3. Nicholson does not fall on the detonator in the book. Instead, the train derails off the bridge when it triggers the fog signal the command crew attach to the rail. They had considered using it to trigger the explosion, but decide otherwise.

I find it interesting how a few small changes at the end make Nicholson go from being a driven man intent on saving his bridge (as in the book) to being remorseful and more sympathetic. I enjoyed the touch of intentional ambiguity over whether he falls accidentally or deliberately pushes the detonator. I think the director didn't like Nicholson's narrow minded collaboration with the enemy in the book and tried to make him more sympathetic. I believe he was unaware that he was collaborating. In his mind he was showing those barbaric Japanese how civilized westerners build things and sees the bridge's manufacturing as a testament to British ingenuity.

Add any other differences I have omitted.

reply

You're definitely right. The book is much more didactic and one-dimensional in its "war is hell" posturing, down to the "shocking" ending. Not only Nicholson, but Shears, who's interchangeable with Warden in the book, and Saito, who's described basically as an alcoholic savage, rather than the movie's complex anti-villain. Credit goes to Lean, the screenwriters and certainly the actors for making Kwai much more shaded and ambiguous.

I'm afraid that you underestimate the number of subjects in which I take an interest!

reply

In the book as I remember the bridge only suffered minor damage. I may be wrong.

reply