Last of the Mohicans: Novel vs. 1992 Film Adaptation

Introduction: A Novel Repeatedly Adapted

The Last of the Mohicans has been adapted into cinematic versions many times, which speaks volumes about the enduring popularity of the book. There is something about the novel that continues to attract modern directors; we have so far been given four different film versions, the latest being directed by Michael Mann, whose credits include Miami Vice. This version appeared in 1992 and featured several prominent Hollywood names, the most notable being Daniel Day-Lewis, who played the role of Hawkeye.

If you have read the book, it is extremely easy to detect the numerous differences between the novel and its cinematic version. In fact, these differences are so obvious and glaring that even a reader who had merely skimmed through the book could see them clearly. However, that does not make the movie any less interesting or engrossing than the book. The credit for that goes to the director, who made shrewd changes to appeal to modern viewers.

The director made crucial changes to the storyline that more or less alter the entire plot while not undermining the basic theme of the novel. Alleva (1992) highlights these differences: "The screenplay, concocted by Mann and Christopher Crowe out of both the novel and the 1936 Randolph Scott movie, rearranges the book's love rivalries, relieves Natty Bumppo of his indifference to sex, disparages the British colonial policies with a vigor that Cooper never employed, kills off characters that the author spared, spares some that he dispatched, and, by necessity, speeds up and streamlines the plot. Yet this version captures an element of Cooper's vision that is indispensable to the special magic of the story."

Cooper's vision remains intact, as does the main theme of the novel. But setting aside the many similarities — which are numerous and therefore not worth cataloguing here — we are left with several crucial differences that set the movie apart from the book and reveal the true cinematic genius of the director. Mann took the right step in altering certain elements because modern viewers can relate more readily to the film's version of the characters and storyline than to the 1757 setting of the source text.

Mann's Changes to Hawkeye's Character

In Cooper's novel, Hawkeye is presented as the archetypal frontier hero — tough, emotionally detached, and almost entirely indifferent to love. Cooper's hero is a man who does not need romance to survive, and he is never seriously in love with any woman. Though he likes Alice, there is an emotional detachment apparent in his attitude toward her and toward the whole idea of love. He is far more interested in being a rough and capable woodsman who can hit a target at any distance and fight hostile enemies without a trace of cowardice.

Cooper's Hawkeye is highly skilled, born and raised in the woods and thoroughly familiar with the rules of the wilderness. Mann's Hawkeye is a somewhat different person. The director preserved the most essential characteristics of the character — his fearlessness and extreme courage — while introducing changes to make him more humane.

Novak (1992) writes: "Mann omits most of Cooper's incidents designed to display Hawkeye's skill as a marksman and scout. This is not all bad, since many of those incidents were so preposterous that Mark Twain, especially annoyed at Hawkeye's ability to hear Indian enemies sneaking up on him in the woods, said in a critical essay that The Leatherstocking Tales should have been called The Broken Twig Series."

The Love Plot and Cora's Fate

In the movie, Hawkeye is shown to be in love with Cora — and here lies one of the most glaring differences from the novel. In the book, Hawkeye was never in love with Cora; he was drawn to her sister Alice. In the film, not only is he romantically involved with Cora, but the two also share a physical relationship. Beyond the romantic shift, Hawkeye is generally more humanized in the adaptation than he was in Cooper's original portrait.

There are other crucial changes as well, including the ending: in the film, Cora survives and ends up with Hawkeye. In the book, however, Cora dies. It is important to understand that Cooper's reasons for killing Cora were deeper than they may initially appear. Cora was more fearless and independent than her sister Alice, and somewhat less conventionally feminine. Cooper preferred more docile women and therefore assigned a tragic fate to Cora while Alice "lives happily ever after" (p. 372). Critics agree that since Cooper belonged to the pre-women's liberation era, he could not come to terms with a character like Cora. He appears to resist female independence, as evidenced by his consistent insistence on referring to women as "females" rather than "women."

Conclusion: Differences That Preserve a Vision

These glaring differences alter the entire storyline but surprisingly manage to keep Cooper's vision and basic themes intact. The credit for the preservation of Cooper's vision and message goes to the director's skillful depiction of key themes. Herndl (2001) summarizes the plot-level divergences well:

"As anyone knows who has both read the novel and seen the film, the plot of Mann's film bears only a slim resemblance to the plot of the novel. Natty Bumppo, the misanthropic loner whose racial background is emphatically 'without a cross' in the novel, becomes Nathaniel Poe, ladies' man, who is still white, but dresses like an Indian and claims the Mohicans as his people and his family. Duncan Heyward is neither a future leader nor a Scot, but becomes an Englishman who is martyred to save Nathaniel and Cora. The romantic 'marriage' subplot which is so minor in the novel changes to the major attraction of the film: Nathaniel and Cora fall in love; Uncas's secret love for the 'dark' (but now unquestionably white) Cora is converted to an acknowledged infatuation with the child-like blonde Alice; and Cora and Alice switch places — now Cora is the true republican mother and Alice the victim."

In other words, while Mann changed many things in the film, he tried to remain close to the core idea of the book and did not alter the elements that bear most directly on Cooper's essential vision. The result is an adaptation that feels fresh and accessible to modern audiences while honoring the spirit of a novel that has captivated readers for nearly two centuries.

References

Herndl, Diane. Style and the Sentimental Gaze in The Last of the Mohicans. (Critical Essay) Narrative; 10/01/2001.

Novak, Ralph. People Weekly (movie reviews); 10/05/1992.

Alleva, Richard. Movie review. Commonweal; 12/18/1992.

Baym, Nina. Feminism and American Literary History: Essays. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Univ. Press, 1992.