# data[].attributes.body
I do think the film director accurately captures the dark humor that Dahl tried to convey in the original story. The way Mary feeds the cops the murder weapon, and especially the way that they stumbled around evince.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes there were changes to the text because in the written story what the husband says stays unknown, in the film you see that he was planing to leave her for another woman. This give Mary more of a motivation for her murder and gives more clarity.

# data[].attributes.body
It does reshape my impression of Mary because it played her as much more of a heartless villain. In the story it seems a lot like shes regrets her choices at least a bit in the film she seems much more calculated.

# data[].attributes.body
The music captured in the film captured the sense of humor, and when the cops are eating the dinner and they say they think the murder weapon is right under their noses when it literally is.

# data[].attributes.body
In both the video and story there is humor made such as Mary using a leg lamb to kill her husband and all of the funny comments made from both Mary and the Police throughout both the film and story

# data[].attributes.body
In the story they talked more and what she said really impacted the story but in the film she didn’t say some of the things she said in the story and that didn’t impact the film.

# data[].attributes.body
In the story you can’t really tell how she looks and acts, but in the film you can she how she looks and all the emotions that’s she has when she killed =her husband.

# data[].attributes.body
He uses the same humor from the book by her using a leg of a lamb and letting the cops eat it for dinner

# data[].attributes.body
In both the story and paper there was humor throughout with Mary killings herr husband with the lamb Oleg and comments made

# data[].attributes.headline
Yes whenever she was making it seem like her husband was killed by someone who broke in we didn’t get much detail of that in the book 

# data[].attributes.subject
Yes whenever she was making it seem like her husband was killed by someone who broke in we didn’t get much detail of that in the book 

# data[].attributes.body
The movie shows a lot more how she killed her husband and how she set up the house to make it seem like something completely different

# data[].attributes.body
In the story there are changes made like her messing up the room and destructing it which shows us how she staged the murder for when the police would come and investigate. In the story on paper we don’t get those details and information.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes my thought on Mary are reshaped because throughout the story on paper we get a deeper meaning in how Mary is feeling and her emotions during the situations. In the video we only get short clips of the situations and barely get any information on how she’s feeling and her thoughts.

# data[].attributes.body
The a used  some humor throughout the story and film for example that Mary could of used something else to kill her husband
.

# data[].attributes.body
As in the story there was a lot more detail and visualization with Mary’s emotions, and what’s going on in her mind, though in the movie, you don’t get to see what’s going on in her head, and what she’s thinking, so we get less depiction of her emotion, which makes her seem like she has less motivation.

# data[].attributes.body
I think he captured humor in both the book and the movie by making little jokes in both of them.

# data[].attributes.body
In the book there wasn’t a mentioned about Mary messing up the leaving room or that she staged her murder, but the movie showed that she staged her crime.

# data[].attributes.body
The changes in the story was different in the story than the film because the story was not prepared but in the film yes

# data[].attributes.body
The film didn’t reshape my impression of Mary, and her motivation didn’t change that much, and her character was the same in the film and in the book.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes i think he acquired his humor in the story by making little jokes in the story.

# data[].attributes.body
The story shows her motivation because it seems that in the story her motivation was little but in the film yes.

# data[].attributes.body
yes becasue in the movie you can get a better understanding than in the movie.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe there were some changes made, like the room being roughed up, but that doesn’t change the story dramatically to the point where it is completely different, and this goes hand and hand with how they didn’t change her motivations.

# data[].attributes.body
From what was said in the scenes, I didn’t see as many remarks of the blunt weapon or them eating the lamb in the short film.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes i think it reshapes her impression because you can see her character in the movie which allows the reader a visual.

# data[].attributes.body
It was different because it didn’t feel as if she has as much of an incentive to murder her husband as in the story, as I never heard much of a reason for the husband to have a divorce.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that Alfred did capture how Dahl made the story suspenseful. However, the humor that was thrown into the story sort of ruined the suspense for me.

# data[].attributes.body
In the film, her husband said that he wanted a divorce, hence the motivation to kill her husband. Her character would also be the same in my opinion. There were changes to the original text, like how Mary called her other friend to ask her to come over for dinner, or like how in the film her husband wants the divorce.

# data[].attributes.body
He put in some parts of humor but left out some of the key parts of humor from Dahls version

# data[].attributes.body
In the book they didn’t put in the part where she messes up the room or patrick leaving for another women

# data[].attributes.body
she had the same motivation and her impression on me didn’t change at all

# data[].attributes.body
In the short film there is very little. The dramatics still stay in the film and story but the humor is taken out and drawn on by suspense.

# data[].attributes.body
There was a small changes like when they specified why Patrick was leaving Mary for another person. This impact the film more because it gives more reasoning for Mary to kill Patrick. Overall the film gave a bit more detail impacting the meaning.

# data[].attributes.body
Mary’s motivation and character was not reshaped from the text to film. Mary still wanted to kill her husband because he was leaving and she till lost it killing him with the lamb leg.

# data[].attributes.body
In it’s original text, the reader can use their imagination. They could imagine the entire scene in their mind. How they wanted it to look like. They can imagine what Mary and the cops look like. In a movie, the director DID capture everything in this story, but the humor. I just felt like it wasn't’ there like it was in the story.

# data[].attributes.body
The only change that was made was that the audience knows why the husband wanted to leave her. Mary still had the same motivations and the same cleverness in hiding her act. The theme did not change.

# data[].attributes.body
Mary’s motivation did not change from the text to the book. She still wanted to kill her husband for leaving her with a child, and her character didn’t change either.

# data[].attributes.body
In the book there wasn’t a mentioned about Mary messing up the leaving room or that she staged her murder, but the movie showed that she staged her crime

# data[].attributes.body
The film didn’t reshaped my impression of Mary, and her motivation didn’t change that much, and her character was the same in the film and in the book

# data[].attributes.body
Alfred Hitchcock kind of captured a sense of humor in the film by when the police officers were describing the murder weapon. They were describing it as large, heavy, and club shaped, just like the lamb. Also at the end of the story she told them they should eat the lamb because her husband would have wanted them to, so this shows how clueless the officers were when finding the murder weapon.

# data[].attributes.body
In the short film we see very little humor. Although the dramatic irony still remains in the film, everyone is very close to emotionless so the humor from the original story loses its purpose by not being properly conveyed. In the story however, Dahl writes the irony and other humor so perfectly you can understand and know when the humor is present.

# data[].attributes.body
Alfred Hitchcock doesn’t do the best job of capturing the humor but I am still able to identify the moments of humor. For instance, when the cops mention that her husband had a way of getting around with other women. It’s ironic because that is the inciting incident that makes the story go a whole different direction. We also can capture when the cops are completely oblivious to the fact their evidence is right in front of them.

# data[].attributes.body
There were changes to the original text but they were necessary to understand the film in particular, and to keep the story from dragging. The first change you notice is the fact that the film lacks context. In the text we see a sense of anxiousness Mary gets when her husband is away. We can infer she is very attached and heavily depends on him, emotionally and financially. In the story the scenes progress and we get a buildup to the inciting incident which is when Patrick tells Mary he is divorcing her. The scenes and events in the film are very straight cutting and lacks flow.

# data[].attributes.body
Alfred Hitchcock did not represent Dahl’s humor well because some of the dialogue that was in the story, which was humorous, was not used in the film.

# data[].attributes.body
In the book it is easier to understand right away the sense of Humor Dahl has, but in the Film Alfred Hitchcock uses a more “dry” sense of humor. Not portraying exactly what Dahl portrayed.

# data[].attributes.body
The author captures Dahls humor. For instance, they used humor for the characters so it can show more of there personality. They just used there humor in different ways.

# data[].attributes.body
In the book it is not mentioned that she messed up the room to make it look like a true murder, but in the movie she staged it.

# data[].attributes.body
The film did not in fact reshape my impression of Mary, i think her main motivation didn’t change much, and her character stayed the same through out the whole film.

# data[].attributes.body
They had added more to the story because when your reading you have to be more descriptive on what happening. It’s different from watching a film and usually you get a better understanding from watching something because you can actually see it. Is harder to picture something from a book unless its really dramatic and descriptive.

# data[].attributes.body
The film reshapes how selfish her husband was which made more sense as to why she killed him. When she did murder him, everything was planned out much better than in the book.  Also, in the book she seemed to have regretted killing him, but in the movie she had no remorse.

# data[].attributes.body
In the story we read a conversation between Mary and the grocery store man where Mary is buying food and explaining that Patrick is tired so they’re just going to eat at home. This impacts the story by not including how quickly Mary acted in order to save her and her baby from harm. Another moment is when the two detectives are speaking alone and one of them states that several pieces to the story of Patricks death are missing. He tells the other detective that he concluded the murderer could only be someone close to Patrick. This impacts the story by showing us that the detectives weren’t as clueless as they seemed in the story they just had no reason think Mary was the murderer.

# data[].attributes.body
In the film it takes out some of the context from the story but also added some parts like when the husband said he wanted to have a divorce that wasn’t in the story but was in the film.

# data[].attributes.body
He had the music go really well with parts in the story. He also captured how the cops were drinking the whiskey that the husband was when he was killed, and definitely when the cops and detectives were saying they think the murder weapon is right under there noses when it literally is.

# data[].attributes.body
Dahl showed humor by when the police where talking about how the murder we open could be under the nose and the music that was playing in the back when it really was right under their nose because they where eating it.

# data[].attributes.body
There were some minor changes, one including the fact that Mary never talks to the grocery store clerk. In the book it tells us how talking to the clerk and having a “normal” conversation calms Mary down. If she is able to pretend and hide her emotions to the clerk, she will be just find talking to the police.

# data[].attributes.body
I do not feel like the sense of humor that Dahl used was correctly captured in the film because in the film it doesn’t use all of the dialogue that Dahl used throughout the story to create the humor and in the film it just misses some of the small moments that were needed to show the humor like when the police come to the house to investigate it didn’t show the same humor as it did in the story.

# data[].attributes.body
I say this because in the story after she already committed the murder there really isn’t much detail explaining what happened when the cops were at the house. In the film it shows you in detail what is happening therefore giving you a closer feel into the story

# data[].attributes.body
Because when the doctor told the detective it was shaped like a club the detective pulls the lamb out of the oven which looks exactly like a club. That’s funny because even after that the cops eat it and drink whiskey.

# data[].attributes.body
Alfred Hitchcock’s interpretation of “Lamb to the Slaughter” conveys Dahl’s humorous writing. The scene where she’s just eating grapes while her dead husband lays on the floor is truly a representation of Dahl’s writing. And the officer’s query about the shape of the club and then them almost immediately eating the most obvious club shaped food in the house, really shows the humor of this story and short film.

# data[].attributes.body
Alfred uses a lot of the same dramatic irony but he adds more to it with suspense from music and adding the fact that when they pulled the leg of lamb out of the oven it was perfectly cooked when it had been in there too long because it was put in frozen but the detectives didn’t catch on that the club shaped leg had been put in there frozen which isn’t typically how you cook a leg of lamb.

# data[].attributes.body
In the very first parts of the written story Dahl mentions how Mary counts down the clock and patiently waits for the returning of her husband, meanwhile the movie does not, it just cuts straight to a scene of Mary’s husband coming home. This impacted the story because in the movie we couldn't see how much effort Mary puts into her marriage, therefore how much her husband wanting a divorce affected her.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that Alfred Hitchcock does capture Dahl’s humor in the film because every time something bad happened like when she killed her husband there was always music and lighting playing in the film.

# data[].attributes.headline
I don’t think he caught the sense of humor because yeah he did have that music when suspenseful parts where going to happen but not like the book

# data[].attributes.subject
I don’t think he caught the sense of humor because yeah he did have that music when suspenseful parts where going to happen but not like the book

# data[].attributes.body
The story film did not reshape my impressions of Mary. She seemed not to feel any regret towards her actions. She never second thought anything she had done. Her motivation was to get back at her husband for what he had done.

# data[].attributes.body
I think Alfred Hitchcock did well on conveying Dahl’s use of humor by the music and effects of the film and how the police said that the murder weapon could be right under their noses when it actually is.

# data[].attributes.body
It wasn’t done very well but it somewhat got it done and still had dramatic irony here and there

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that Alfred Hitchcock did not portray Dahl’s humor very well. Reading the story allows the reader to picture what the characters are like and how funny/unfunny the humor is. Watching a short film is not as up for interpretation and causes the person watching to not be able to use their imagination as much.

# data[].attributes.body
In the reading it says how she anxiously waited for her husband to get home but in the film it doesn’t have that, which makes the movie not tell us that she’s anxious. In the story after she had killed him she went to the store but in the movie she made the place look more like a murder scene and this impacted it more because it shows how she was thinking in that moment.

# data[].attributes.body
In the movie it takes out some context from the story but also adds some like when the man try’s to tell Mary why he wants to leave her but it isn’t well done to show why

# data[].attributes.body
,because i already had a general idea of what Mary was feeling. The only thing the film adds is emotion because we are seeing her facial expression, gestures, and tone. The film however, clarifies how she is feeling so we don’t have to interpret as we did reading the story. I understand her motivations, she was feeling anger after she had put in so much love towards her husband. Throughout the film and the story i could understand the attributes of Mary. She is smart, impulsive, and a quick thinker . In conclusion the film had little effect on my impressions and viewpoint of Mary.

# data[].attributes.body
In the story she just loses and kills her husband and goes to the store like normal. In the film you see that she is in shock as if Mary was dissociated from reality and she doesn’t really know what she was doing.

# data[].attributes.body
It not only reshapes my impression of her but also adds to my knowledge of how innocent Mary acts after having killed her husband. Her actions and choice of words she uses to try to make her look innocent when in reality she isn’t. The show of her body language also helps me see how manipulative she is to the cops by letting them be oblivious to the fact she, the suspect, is right in front of them.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes there were some changes made that were needed to help the viewer understand more of what was going on. Like when Mary went to the grocer to get an alibi and just cutting down some of the emotions that Mary had in the story before she killed Patrick and in some instances after.

# data[].attributes.headline
Yes in the story they said why he wanted to leave her which made more sense to why she kind of acted in the way she did

# data[].attributes.subject
Yes in the story they said why he wanted to leave her which made more sense to why she kind of acted in the way she did

# data[].attributes.body
I think the film wasn’t very funny until the very end when Mary starts to giggle because she got through being questioned and covered up her murder completely mainly because woman weren’t thought to do things like that back in the day especially house wife’s that are pregnant.

# data[].attributes.body
In the book and film they changed something’s from the original text for example in the text it said that once Patrick came home Mary gave him a glass and something for herself while in the film Patrick got his own glass and Mary didn’t get anything to drink.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that Alfred Hitchcock does capture Dahl’s humor in the film, by using effects like lighting and music to convey it. He conveyed it like when she killed her husband with the leg of lamb, and the cops point out the weapon is something shaped like a club, and they then proceed to eat the lamb.

# data[].attributes.body
Because the film had a lot more story after the murder compared to the book. Also in the book it didn’t mention Mary making a scene so it looked like a fight happened, which influences the suspense in this film.

# data[].attributes.body
Throughout the written version of “Lamb to the Slaughter”, Mary almost completely strays away from all suspicion within just a few pieces of dialogue between Mary and the detectives. Meanwhile in the short film, the detectives immediately start doubting Mrs. Maloney and they don’t believe that there was a fight, which is what Mary set up. She only escapes when she gets rid of the murder weapon.

# data[].attributes.body
When the detectives talk about how Mr. Maloney got around with the ladies and was asking Mary over and over again if he had been stressed or worried-like, it allows the watcher to see Mary’s face as she realizes that her husband hadn’t only cheated once, but most likely many times and shows how she acted out of anger when she only thought he cheated with one woman.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes one difference is how in the story Dahl doesn’t tell us he is leaving Mary. In the film Dahl tells us that he is leaving her for another woman

# data[].attributes.body
The short film allows us to get a better visual of Mary and see how she reacts to what she did. In the story she is described to have some regret and a little worry. In the short film however, Mary doesn’t look sorry and barely looks worried. She appears to have no regrets but is still a little worried that something might happen to her.

# data[].attributes.body
The film did reshape my impression about Mary because when she killed her husband she showed no empathy for him. I think she got her motivation by hearing her husband wanting to have a divorce so she decided to kill him.

# data[].attributes.body
The film did reshape my thoughts about her. Seeing her facial expressions made me change what I though when I read the book. Seeing how she acted when being questioned also changed my impressions on her, she seemed more careful and was acting like she was hurt that he died. In the end of the film when she laughed changed my impression of her looking more creepy and being happy she got away with killing him.

# data[].attributes.body
In movie she thinks smarter and can tell she put more thought into making it seem like someone else killed him

# data[].attributes.body
I actually don’t think Alfred Hitchcock captured because the movie was more morbid and suspenseful than the written story version.

# data[].attributes.body
Alfred hickcok did acuretley use the dark dramatic humor Dahl used, this is shown by how the cops are talking about the murder weapon and about the murder being a woman right in front of mary.

# data[].attributes.body
There were changing to the text from the original like in the beginning how it was talking about how Mary was waiting for her husband to get back and counting down the minutes on the clock but didn’t end up doing that in the beginning of the scene in the short film.

# data[].attributes.body
Watching the film made me realize what Mary’s motive was towards killing Patrick. In the story, Dahl does not give us much information about Patrick’s reason for leaving, Mary’s reason for killing Patrick, or how Mary acted towards the cops and detectives.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes in the short film she didn’t seem to be what i expected from reading the story. She was more calm and less angry than in the story

# data[].attributes.body
I think the film doesn’t capture Dahl’s humor because there really wasn’t any in the film. Maybe on what a person thinks is funny.

# data[].attributes.body
The film reshaped my impressions on Mary by it giving me her reactions on her face because in the book it doesn’t tell us what her face expressions were and we get to hear her motivation on why she killed Patrick in the first place.

# data[].attributes.body
Some changes are when she was talking to her husband in the book his reasons for leavening yer are unclear in the movie its stated.

# data[].attributes.body
In my opinion I think in the film they tried to insert some humor like there was in the story. In the film it is difficult to detect the humor if there was any. Whereas in the book you didn’t have to try find the humor it was simply just there.
In conclusion, i think the film makers attempted to insert the humor but in the end failed.

# data[].attributes.body
Some changes that affect the story is some lines especially with the officers and the grocer are put in or taken out, and you getting context to why Patrick wants to leave her. This does change the meaning of the story as it shows a better reason to why she killed him and why he wanted to leave her.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes, the short film did change my impressions of Mary because it showed me exactly how she got away with the murder and how acted while being questioned by the police and it helps me to understand specifically what caused her to commit the murder.

# data[].attributes.body
The short film does reshape my impression on Mary, because i got to see more of her emotion played out in a scene and how she tricked the police officers into believing that she was just an innocent house wife that could never kill her husband.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes i think after watching the film it helps reshape my impression of Mary. In the film you can see Marys facial expression and how she looks anxious and nervous  when the cops ask her questions.

# data[].attributes.body
The film reshaped my impression of Mary because i was able to visually see how her face expressions change throughout the film.

# data[].attributes.body
The movie goes into more detail about the Lea this shell go to get away with her crime. In the book she seems more despite in the movie she seems a lot more relaxed and more confident.