MovieChat Forums > Never Let Me Go (2010) Discussion > Why was this scene changed from the one ...

Why was this scene changed from the one in the novel

posted 11 years ago by redhotridinghood
5 replies | jump to latest

I could be completely wrong about this but I thiought that in the novel when Tommy gives Cathy the tape and she's sitting listening to it clutching the pillow it's Madame who sees her and finds it heartbreaking because she thinks that Cathy's clutching it like it's a baby and she knows that the clones are created so they can't reproduce. And Cathy in turn does think that the song is about someone losing their baby hence her rocking the pillow
However in the movie it's Ruth who sees and I presume feels jealous about her and Tommy. I always thought that it should have remained as it was in the book as in the movie Madame's character isn't really explored. She just shows up, seems to be wary of them and nothing more until Tommy and Cathy visit her. It made her feelings towards the clones far more sympathetic especially when she refers to them as "poor creatures" at the end.

[–] daelion167 11 years ago

You are right, I thought it was a weird change to make as well. Can't imagine a better movie being made based on the book but the book was still far better.

[–] TheLurkingFox 11 years ago

"the clones are created so they can't reproduce"

I don't see why they couldn't reproduce. If they've been recreated 100% as the original is there's no reason for them to be unable to procreate.

*****
With the newspaper strike on, I wouldn't consider dying! /Bette Davis/

[–] greg-233 11 years ago

"I don't see why they couldn't reproduce. If they've been recreated 100% as the original is there's no reason for them to be unable to procreate."

The clones in Aldous Huxley's Brave New World had undergone some genetic manipulation to place them within their ordained roles in society. (Ranging from Alpha Plus Intellectual to Epsilon-Minus Semi-Moron.)

Although it isn't shown, the clones in Never Let Me Go must have had some similar treatment in their development to make them sterile. It would be a way of enforcing their status as a separate class. If the clones were capable of having children, that might complicate matters.

[–] redhotridinghood 11 years ago

You're right it's not mentioned in the movie but it is in the book. I would presume as the other post suggested having children would complicate matters with emotional attachments but also if they got pregnant, it strains the body and it could go wrong. They could get something like diabetes or they could even die. And the fact that at the end Miss Emily remarks about there is a presumption (I guess by the general population) that they didn't have souls and were seen as less than ordinary people I would therefore imagine any scientist engineering a clone would make it so they couldn't reproduce so that these people would be more comfortable knowing that their only purpose in life was to donate. It makes it easier to bear having clones if they seem less than human, as one of the basic rights of being a human is procreation.

So as they were so valuable because of their donations I think it can be presumed that they couldn't reproduce.
Also in the book they are completely allowed and even encouraged to have sex as much as they like with other clones but not with non-clones as maybe they worried they may also form emotional attachments to them or could get STDs which made them unhealthy and perhaps unable to donate.
Just my theory...

[–] spookyrat1 11 years ago

Thanks for clarifying that as I haven't read the book and was wondering about pregnancy when seeing Ruth and Tommy doing what comes naturally. Knowing that, makes Madame's remarks about them being "poor creatures" that much clearer.