Cat on a Hot Tin Roof - Play vs. Movie comparison

Cat on a Hot Tin Roof (Play vs. Movie analysis)

The play and film of Cat on a Hot Tin Roof differ in various ways. In this essay, I will go through some of the differences that I have noticed (to the best of my recollection.) I will comment on the nature and significance of these differences from my point of view. 

An early scene unique to the film worth noting; As the family drama begins to unfold, we are taken to the airfield where Big Daddy, accompanied by his wife and doctor, is greeted by the rest of the family (except Brick.) Firstly, watching a man descend from a private jet especially in the late 1950s clearly indicates to the viewer that this is a man of means and significant wealth. Flying privately was very expensive and not very common in those days. 

Another aspect of the welcoming party scene is Mae emerging as a woman extremely eager to impress and “show her devotion” to Big Daddy. Not only is she deeply invested in trying to gain his attention and approval, but she uses her children as pawns in her effort to win Big Daddy over. This scene sets the stage for later events where it becomes overwhelmingly clear that she is absolutely determined to seize Big Daddy’s estate and fortune. She is willing to be two-faced and use any form of flattery, step on others in a cruel and sinister way, anything to gain more of a standing in the competition for Big Daddy’s wealth. For some reason, in her mind, it is all justified by her need to secure the inheritance and make sure that it gets into the “right” hands. This scene also indicates that Big Daddy knows exactly what he is dealing with, and he despises every aspect of it. The film does a great job, in this instance, and many further ones portraying the nature of the conflict between Mae and others in the family in all of its manifestations.  

The opening scene in the film is different than that of the play. Instead of the opening being a conversation between Maggie and Brick like in the play, the movie begins with Brick on his own. This shifts the narrative from being a dynamic presentation and exploration of many different characters to one that is more centered around a troubled young man seeking to navigate through an existential and emotional crisis. The film further displays its focus on Brick’s evolution through the addition of the lengthy scene later on where Brick and Big Daddy get into a deep dialogue about the nature and meaning of human existence. 

For most of the play, Brick remains composed. There is not much raw emotion being displayed. The scene in the film that takes place in the basement truly opens up a whole new dimension to the story. The viewer is suddenly faced with a strong display of the inner turmoil that Brick is experiencing. Big Daddy gets to talking about money and “things” and fortune and gets very upset with the direction that the conversation is going. Brick does not rely on words to express his frustration with the blindness that he sees in his father. After destroying a lot of furniture and passionately voicing his disregard for the value of material possessions, things settle down and Brick and Big Daddy get to talking. 

  The narrative almost gets turned on its head. Big Daddy, the most powerful figure in the story is being challenged by his son in a way he never expected to be. Brick brings to Big Daddy’s attention that though he made many monetary transactions on behalf of his family and employees, his emotional and interpersonal transactions with them are close to none. Big Daddy comes to the realization that while it is true that his father left him with no substantial physical inheritance, the one thing, a father’s love, that his father did give him may have been exceedingly more valuable and instrumental in his life than any material thing that his father would have left behind. 

In a general sense, the play portrays and focuses on the trickery and lies that transpire in this story. The film, however, includes what the alternative could and should look like. It points to the infinite value of love. The love between father and son, husband and wife, and siblings and friends. The film leaves the viewer with the lesson that finding a way to love and accept one another reigns superior to any kind of money or material objects one can give another. This concept is also expressed through the additional scene in the film when Big Mamma and Maggie converse about what it means to have a happy home. This is also seen in the final scenes of the film where Brick, Big Daddy, and Gooper come to a genuine and fair understanding of each other. 

There are a few other stylistic differences between the play and film. The film appears to be more sensitive to certain issues. For example, the film does away with big mama being fat. This removes many references to that effect that were included in the play. Some of the comedy inserted in the play relied on the fact that Big Mama was fat. For instance, after relating the truth about Big Daddy’s condition, Dr. Baugh says “Well, keep your chin up Big Mama.” Gooper follows up with “she’s gonna keep both chins up, aren’t you, Big Mama?” The film left out this and all other comments surrounding Big Mamm’s obesity. This change can most likely be attributed to a desire to cater to a larger crowd It is also possible that the film director had limited options/contenders for this role. 

Another deviation from the play, albeit a small one, is the replacement of the word “crap” which was used in the play, to the word “bull” used in the movie. This takes place when Big Mamma is faced with the true news about her husband and the desires of Mae and Gooper to take over. She exclaims “I’m gonna say it as Big Daddy does! What’s that word he uses…?” The word “bull” is more subtle than “crap.” This is another manifestation of the film being designed for a broader audience.

In the written play there are numerous instances where Brick is either singing or humming. I am not quite sure why the singing is completely left out in the film. Is it because Paul Newman, the actor playing the role of Brick, was not good at singing? Is it to maintain a somber image of Brick? This remains a mystery to me. (as a musician I would have liked to see the musical aspect in the film.)

All things considered, the movie and play are great compositions. Whatever one lacked or omitted, was made up by additions that the other didn’t have. This is why the film and play remain the timeless classics that they are today, and they will probably retain that status for many years to come.