The Giver: A Deep Dive into my Thoughts on Book vs. Movie Differences

Note after finishing the post: This post turned out a whole lot longer than anticipated, but I guess it's not too much of a surprise; there's a ton to talk about. Hopefully someone will find at least parts of it interesting. If not, that's okay, I enjoy having this for my future self.


I read most of the most in one day and then watched the movie later that day, so there were so many thoughts. For the first 20 minutes of the film or so, I stood up literally every few minutes to talk to my mom about thoughts I had on various things I noticed/minor differences etc. (I'm sure this would have continued if I didn't have to wait to finish the movie until later when my mom was asleep)

I wanted to discuss those thoughts here.

The things I talk about are in no particular order.

Oh, also, spoilers, btw. Book is fantastic, so I recommend reading it before you read any further if you haven't already.

Change #1: How memories are transferred.

Book: Person receiving memories takes off their shirt and lies face down with the person giving the memories putting their hands on the receiver's back.

Movie: Grasp forearms to give/receive memories.

I really liked this change in the movie; I think it makes a lot of sense. Especially for the scene where The Giver is in pain and Jonas tries to help (and ends up receiving the memory of war); I feel like it's a lot easier/less awkward and cumbersome for that to happen if Jonas doesn't have to go over to the table and lie down with his shirt off. 

I feel like it's just cleaner overall to do the arm grasp thing. I feel like this is the case for both the book and the movie; that the book would have been slightly cleaner overall if the transfer happened through grasping forearms.

Change #2: Fiona

So the two side characters both get a much bigger role in the movie compared to the book; I enjoy these changes for the most part. I think both make a lot of sense for a movie adaptation. Since the book is so short, developing these characters to more fully flesh out the movie makes a lot of sense.

Fiona is a clear romantic interest in the movie; in the book, Jonas has The Stirrings and clearly cares about Fiona, but that's about it.

I'm a sucker for a cute romantic subplot, and I think it's nice for Jonas to be able to share these experiences with someone, but I also think the simplicity in the book does a lot; allows it to focus on the core meanings/feelings of the book. I enjoy both, so it's fun that I can experience one through one medium and the other through a different medium.

Change #3: Asher

As stated, Asher also gets a bigger role in the movie. In the book his job becomes Assistant Activity Director and simply plays a minor supporting role throughout the book, similar to Fiona. In the movie, his job becomes a pilot, and plays a major role.

As Fiona and Jonas grow closer, Asher becomes a little more distant. When Jonas goes to leave the community, Asher tries to stop him. They get in a scramble and Jonas ends up punching his best friend to be able to leave. Later, Asher is told to find Jonas out in Elsewhere and to "lose" him. When Asher finds Jonas, he chooses to trust his friend and let him go.

I enjoy these changes quite a bit because it feels in theme with the rest of the topics the movie/book tackle. I enjoy the addition of the topics of trust and betrayal. Although, once again, it could be stated that the simplicity of the book allows it to focus on it's main core, which is totally fair, I think.

Change #4: High Council Lady

In the book, this character simply doesn't exist. In the movie, she kind of plays the antagonist -- quite an interesting one, I may say. I particularly enjoy the scene near the end where Fiona is about to be released; The Giver and the High Council Lady have a powerful conversation.

Overall, the thing the High Council Lady really does for me is solve an issue I have at the end of the book. 

That is, the reason for leaving suddenly: In the book, they just decided that the best time to leave was at the ceremony that is coming up in a couple-few weeks, so I guess they went, "I guess we better rush preparing right this second instead of planning and preparing. There's surely no other time we could leave, so let's just rush prepping for this super important mission." Idk, I just feel there was no real reason for Jonas to leave right that minute. In the end, it was good they were prepping as they learned Gabriel was going to be released, so Jonas took Gabriel along with him. But as far as I recall, Gabriel didn't rush their plans, but just fit in with their already established timeline.

In the movie, the High Council Lady is onto their plans. This gives them a reason to start preparing. They weren't, however, going to activate the plan quite yet until Jonas learned that Gabriel was going to be released; that changed things, and he left immediately. In the book, learning about baby Gabriel being released didn't change things very much. In the movie, it was a big deal, which I like more.

Thoughts on other more minor changes:

• Age Change: In the book you graduate when you're 12. In the movie, you graduate when you're 18. So in the book, Jonas is 11/12ish, and in the movie he's 17/18ish. I think the older age makes a lot of sense -- for various things Jonas does and experiences (both in real life and through the memories), I think having an older/more mature individual makes a lot of sense.
• In the book, when a memory is transferred, the memory leaves whoever is giving it. I think this is interesting, but 100% makes sense to cut in a movie setting.
• In the book, there was no "boundary of memories", but it sounded like the memories just slowly got released as Jonas got further and further away. Making a boundary makes sense for a movie since it sets up for a more suspenseful moment at the end. I don't mind either way since in the book we don't get to see the effects of Jonas leaving anyway, so it being a boundary or not would make little difference in the book, imo.
• Not really a change, but noteworthy regardless: Both the movie and the book's "solution" feel a little contrived, so I don't care for them either way. In the movie, they found a map with the "boundary of memories" and were just like, "oh, if one of us crosses it, all the memories would disperse for sure for sure". In the book, they learned that when Rosemary (the receiver before Jonas) died, the memories she had got dispersed. So I guess they were just like, "Yeah, so if you just get really far away, the memories will disperse for sure for sure."
• Memory super powers are a thing in the book, which I think is a lot of fun, but 100% makes sense to cut in the movie. When I say memory super powers, I'm referencing how when memories of warm places were recalled, the person would physically warm up; this helped Jonas and Gabriel survive in the cold. When memories of cold places were recalled, the person would physically cool down; this helped Jonas and Gabriel not get noticed by the heat-sensing planes. 
• Felt like the book did a better job at emphasizing how important it was to fit in. The scene when Jonas is skipped over during the ceremony where everybody gets their jobs is a HUGE deal in the book; he is super duper freaking out -- in the movie he is sorta freaking out, but I feel it glides over it pretty quickly.
• In the book, Jonas ends up receiving the memory of war because he sees The Giver in pain and wants to help him. So Jonas takes the memory of the war away. In the movie, Jonas sees The Giver completely out of it in pain, and receives the memory accidentally. I think both are fine. In the book, they build up the fact that The Giver is in a lot of pain sometimes, so the way it works out in the book makes sense. In the movie, they don't have time to build it up, so the way it works out in the movie makes sense too.
• The book emphasizes much more the loneliness of being the only one with all the memories/feelings/everything. I find the exploration of having someone who knows what you're feeling and related topics quite powerful in the book.

Well, thanks for joining me. Just like my Yahtzee post, this ended up a whole lot longer than I expected it to, and I could 100% expand on many of the things I talked about. Once again, makes me think about trying things in a video style; we'll see if that desire continues to build momentum or not; I'm not sure they will. Regardless, I'm happy with these thoughts I have written up:)

Actual Brownie Points

So in line with things that I did in the past that I think are fantastic (the other being The Record*), I used to hand out actual brownie points when people did things that I felt warranted a brownie point. And then I would actually make them a pan of brownies once they reached 5 brownie points. It was fantastic.

If I remember correctly, Orin was actually the only one to ever reach 5 brownie points, and I did indeed deliver on my promise of making him a pan of brownies. He made several brownie points by asking if he could get one if he made ___ basketball shot and then proceeded to make ___ basketball shot; mostly half-court shots, I think. His 5th point I'm fairly confident came from a half-court shot.

I think Nathaniel is currently sitting at 4 brownie points, haha. Perhaps one day he'll earn his 5th. Frankly, him following through with his promise of replacing my copy of the Mistborn Trilogy several years after the fact when most people would have just forgotten is deserving of a brownie point. So maybe next time I see him, I'll have to bring that up and then make him a pan of brownies or something.

Thomas, well, we don't actually remember. When I asked if Thomas ever reached 5 brownie points, he said "I do not think so. But maybe. I feel like I remember getting brownies at some point." I pretty much had the exact same thoughts, haha.

Anyway/All in all/Point Being/To Sum Up/In Summary**: I think actual brownie points are fantastic. It's not a bit I currently plan on picking up again, but maybe one day I'll start awarding actual brownie points again; guess we'll have to wait and see.

*Side note about The Record: I've decided to not count my own; I have stopped using the phrase since I made the post, cutting myself off when I find myself about to say it lest I have to record it. So I will no longer record my own so I can go back to using the phrase when I want. I'm also not going to count videos/other media, only usages from my friends etc. Btw, definitely failed to write down one that Ben said, so, sorry Ben, it did not get recorded in The Record. 

Also, originally this whole thing was in parathesis in the parathesis, but I found it made the paragraph too big/clunky, so I'm experimenting with this footnote thing. I think I like it quite a bit.

**Just too many good transitions; they all felt good, but none of them felt perfect, so I decided to use all of them

Twenty One Pilots Songs Tier List (Clancy Update)

The impossible task has been accomplished once again.

Few important notes:

1. For songs with a different versions, I just chose my favorite out of the versions to display on the list.

2. I'm sure I could spend many many many more hours shifting songs by a few spots here and a few spots there, but I feel pretty good about it overall. With a list this big and with so many different factors to what/how I enjoy a song, it's a wonder I can get it to this point, haha. Even as I gave it its final form, I know if I spent literally 5 more minutes I could find something to shift, but I need to cut it off somewhere, and like I said, I feel pretty good about it overall.

3. The new album is SO GOOD. It makes me so happy:) I love it so much.

Here's my previous rankings: 

https://whateveriwant7.blogspot.com/2022/05/cant-work-on-it-forever-tp-fav-songs.html

Deep Dive into our 50 Games of Yahtzee

The Question:

So once upon a time, we were playing Yahtzee after dinner with my grandmother as we do, since Yahtzee is one of the few games she'll play with us. And I pondered, "How many games of Yahtzee in a row do we need to have to mitigate luck and show who is truly better at Yahtzee?"

Spoilers:

Like, quite possibly hundreds and hundreds, imo. Yahtzee is a ludicrous amount of luck, hahaha.

We took it to ChatGPT:

But we took this question to the great source of ChatGPT and asked it to give us a low estimate and a high estimate of the number of games we would need to play (combining all the scores at the end). 

It responded: Low estimate: 20 games. High estimate: 50.

Gameplan: Add each game's total to a spreadsheet. See the results after 20 games. I also decided to keep track of 2 other important numbers outside of score: Total number of Yahtzees and Bonus Yahtzees.

Btw, Bonus Yahtzee's are BROKEN:

Bonus Yahtzee's are BROKEN. Seriously broken busted. 100 points is an insane amount PLUS you often can chuck that five-of-a-kind up on top, making making your top sooo much easier. Broken broken broken.

And So It Begins:

And so we started off on our journey. Most days after dinner, we would play a couple-few games of Yahtzee and would. After a couple-few weeks, Grandma, Mom, Eric, and I finished our 20 games of Yahtzee, and then for some wild reason, my mom, Eric, and I decided we were going to sit down and play 30 more games. Right then. We, of course, did not take turns in any form during these 30 games, which made it significantly faster, but it still took quiiiite a while. But it was kind of a blast, haha.

Stats from the 20 games:

1st Place: Mother with 5530 points (an average of 276 points per game).

2nd Place: Alex with 4962 points (an average of 248.1 points per game).

3rd Place: Grandma with 4894 points (an average of 244.7 points per game).

4th Place: Eric with 4604 points (an average of 230.2 points per game).

But the yahtzee/bonus yahtzee stats are really important here.

Mom: 7 Yahtzees, 7 Bonus Yahtzees

Alex: 8 Yahtzees, 1 Bonus Yahtzee

Grandma: 7 Yahtzees, 2 Bonus Yahtzees

Eric: 6 Yahtzees, 0 Bonus Yahtzees

After Mom got 4 Bonus Yahtzees in the course of 3 games, I knew our chances were not good.

Stats from the 50 games:

1st Place: Mom with 13633 points (an average of 272.66 points per game).

2nd Place: Alex with 12464 points (an average of 249.28 points per game).

3rd Place: Eric with 11889 points (an average of 237.78 points per game).

Mom: 23 Yahtzees, 15 Bonus Yahtzees

Alex: 21 Yahtzees, 2 Bonus Yahtzees

Eric: 18 Yahtzees, 2 Bonus Yahtzees

The fact that my mother was able to get 38 Yahtzees over the course of 50 games is actually ludicrous, with 15 of those being in the same game as other Yahtzees making them more than twice as good. Simply crazy. I was hoping that playing another 30 games would spread out the Bonus Yahtzee love, but nope. My mom just kept rolling Bonus Yahtzees. 

Also minor note here: In one of the games, she crossed out Yahtzee fairly early into one of the games and then her next two rolls were yahtzees; she could've had one more Yahtzee and one more Bonus Yahtzee. Actually bonkers.

Answer to our Original Question:

Like, a bonkers number of Yahtzee games are needed to actually mitigate luck. The choices you make obviously do matter in Yahtzee -- you can't simply pick up all 5 dice and huck them for all 3 rolls. However, the base strategy is so simplistic that in order for the small decision differences between players to actually shine forth, you would need hundreds and hundreds (probably even thousands and thousands or maybe more) of games to see which players make better decisions.

Granted, as I say that, there's presumably a better way. Theoretically there's always a best move to optimize potential points. Figure this out with a computer doing tons of stat things and then create many different scenarios. Ask the players what they would do in all these different scenarios and see how accurate they are. 

Training an AI with your playstyle and letting it play hundreds of thousands of games is also a potential option, I think.

How Good Can You Actually Get:

Theoretically, you can become "perfect" at Yahztee. You know the statistics so well that you always choose to roll the dice in a way that maximizes profit. The thing, ofc, about such an extremely luck based game as Yahtzee is the difference between being "perfect" and "really good" at Yahtzee is quite small. The perfect player won't win that many more games, and would need hundreds of games to show they win more often.

And getting "really good" at Yahtzee is not hard at all. It legit takes very very little study. You can't get that good at Yahtzee. And the initial getting good is 1000x easier than the final push to becoming perfect.

Additional Strategy Note:

I realize the strategy of playing a single game is a little different than playing 50+ games combined. In a single game, looking at your opponent's scores can actually become quite important. If an opponent, for example, already has scored a Yahtzee and a Bonus Yahtzee, the only way you're winning that game is if you also score a Yahztee and a Bonus Yahtzee as well. Thus, you never cross out Yahztee and you push for it in circumstances you wouldn't have had otherwise. Most of the time this will lead to an overall lower score for that game, but it will give you a chance to actually win -- which is the goal. (Granted, this dives into other topics dealing with the concepts of how playing for 2nd should be important too etc. etc., but I think that's a topic for another time.)

When playing 50+ games back combined, the strategy shifts more to what statistically gets you the most points regardless of how many points the other players have (until you're approaching the end of the 50+ games, I suppose).

Conclusion:

Okay, this post turned out way longer than I thought it was going to be; there's a surprising number of thoughts that Yahtzee brings up that I want to unpack and talk about. And there's still more I want to talk about. Why I hate Bonus Yahtzees but I'm not sure if I should (long story short, I hate them because they're completely unbalanced and stupid, but 'fun' is an important thing in games, and maybe they simply add fun to an already luck based game and that's good even though they're stupid), the whole 2nd place mattering thing, other thoughts on our final scores, and probably some other stuff too. But I'll call it here. I'll perhaps have to continue these conversations in other blog posts or maybe in a ¿¿¿video???. Idk, guess we'll see. 

TØP Rap Statistics

Giving myself a tad more time to work on my TØP song tier list, so in the mean time: Stats.

I've previously done a total count of all twenty one pilots songs and exactly half of them contained rap, which I thought was really cool. 

Since then, Clancy (an album of 13 songs) and 2 singles have come out. (Also lowkey I swear Scaled and Icy came out since I did it, but the math doesn't check out, so idk man). 

15 songs. An odd number.

That means the tie will be no more.

Granted.... turns out based off my very detailed analysis of every single song this time around, it appears there perhaps was no tie in the first place, so that's a little awkward for sure. I guess I didn't catch some songs that had rap or something the last time I did this.

But still! Even without a tie to break, cool thing to look at!

Here are the counts:

Self-Titled: 5 Rap, 9 Non-Rap

Regional at Best: 7 Rap, 3 Non-Rap (Note: As usual, I'm counting Lovely in this album, but not the rest of the songs that got remastered onto Vessel (Lovely never had an official release on Vessel in the U.S., which is why))

Vessel: 8 Rap, 4 Non-Rap

Blurryface: 8 Rap, 6 Non-rap (Note: This contains a pick for rap that I'm still very unsure about. Feel free to take a look at Not Today (it's already time-stamped) and lmk if you think that part is rap or not. There were several picks throughout this whole process that was tough to discern, but in the end I feel fairly confident in all of them except this one.)

Trench: 8 Rap, 6 Non-rap

Scaled and Icy: 4 Rap, 7 Non-rap

Clancy: 7 Rap, 6 Non-rap

Singles: 1 Rap, 2 Non-rap (With both newest singles being non-rap.)

Bringing our totals to:

48 Rap, 43 Non-Rap

Fascinating indeed.

Here's an image of the break down: