When we watch a movie adapted from a novel, we often find ourselves contemplating the differences between the two, especially if we've read the book. Here's an example: the film The Wandering Earth showcases how one basic story can be told in two different ways. The story takes place in the future when the sun is rapidly degenerating. As nuclear fusion approaches its end, the Solar System is on the brink of nonexistence. To cope with the Solar Crisis, the United Earth Government, succeeding the UN, carries out the Moving Mountain Project (also known as the Wandering Earth Project), with plans to build 10,000 Earth engines to propel the planet to a stable orbit. In the novel, the writer generally focuses on the future society under the influence of a global crisis, including aspects such as careers, daily life, marriage, etc. It also mentions how fragile such a society is when the fear of dictatorship and conspiracy toward science surpasses human intellect and trust in the government. In the film, however, the adaptation enriches the story with technical details and plot enhancements, all aimed at attracting the audience. Two clues run through the entire film. The visible one is a chain of crises and emergencies caused by the greatest crisis and its effects. Paradoxically, the policies aimed at solving the crisis occasionally become the crisis itself. The second, less conspicuous clue revolves around the interplay between Artificial Intelligence and human choices. Despite the disparities, one thing in common is the determination and bravery inherent in humanity, as the writer wrote, "the courage of human beings is beyond generations." In conclusion, there's no specific link between a movie's worth and its revision. What matters most is its ability to deliver gripping plots and evoke deep emotions. So, with warmest wishes, as you embark on this captivating journey, enjoy the pleasure of both reading and watching