Oh--and while I'm thinking of cautionary tales...
I have no idea if Killing Bono will ever be released in Canada. I hope for an eventual DVD. And in the meantime, I read reviews.
These are mixed but still sound like fun. I have, however, spotted a couple that remark the portrayal of Bono (a minor character in the story) is unnecessarily sugar-coated. Apparently he is depicted as a very nice guy.
Okay, since the movie is called a "true-ish" story rather than a true one, let's ignore the possibility that in real life Bono is, in fact, a very nice guy. (He may well be. But as I keep reminding you all, I like him so I'm open to the possibility.)
No, let's consider this portrayal strictly from the point of view of the movie, and to a lesser extent perhaps the book.
Here's the thing: it's a story of frustration and ambition and jealousy and eventual self-discovery, right? The main character, Neil, apparently comes off as a bit of a tool in the book (which the real Neil wrote) and a complete tool in the movie. The whole point of the story appears to be for Neil to realize he's his own worst enemy and to adjust his perspective and ambitions toward something achievable that could make him happy.
So the real conflict is internal. Bono and U2 are, really, just a symbol of that conflict, to get all English-majory for a second. It doesn't matter if Bono is a good guy or not, because Neil's problem isn't Bono in the first place. If you portray him as a genuine adversary, you're just muddying the waters. The point is, Neil's enemy is Neil, not Bono.
And that being the case, especially given that Bono is a very minor part of this movie... why not make him a decent guy? As far as I'm concerned, it seems like having THE ENEMY be a perfectly nice guy would serve to emphasize the pointless silliness of a lot of Neil's behaviour.
(I accept that some people hate Bono and are going to this movie hoping for a fictitious murder story, but like the man said, you can't always get what you want.)
These are mixed but still sound like fun. I have, however, spotted a couple that remark the portrayal of Bono (a minor character in the story) is unnecessarily sugar-coated. Apparently he is depicted as a very nice guy.
Okay, since the movie is called a "true-ish" story rather than a true one, let's ignore the possibility that in real life Bono is, in fact, a very nice guy. (He may well be. But as I keep reminding you all, I like him so I'm open to the possibility.)
No, let's consider this portrayal strictly from the point of view of the movie, and to a lesser extent perhaps the book.
Here's the thing: it's a story of frustration and ambition and jealousy and eventual self-discovery, right? The main character, Neil, apparently comes off as a bit of a tool in the book (which the real Neil wrote) and a complete tool in the movie. The whole point of the story appears to be for Neil to realize he's his own worst enemy and to adjust his perspective and ambitions toward something achievable that could make him happy.
So the real conflict is internal. Bono and U2 are, really, just a symbol of that conflict, to get all English-majory for a second. It doesn't matter if Bono is a good guy or not, because Neil's problem isn't Bono in the first place. If you portray him as a genuine adversary, you're just muddying the waters. The point is, Neil's enemy is Neil, not Bono.
And that being the case, especially given that Bono is a very minor part of this movie... why not make him a decent guy? As far as I'm concerned, it seems like having THE ENEMY be a perfectly nice guy would serve to emphasize the pointless silliness of a lot of Neil's behaviour.
(I accept that some people hate Bono and are going to this movie hoping for a fictitious murder story, but like the man said, you can't always get what you want.)