my childhood is lost in translation
I remember most of the books I read and loved when I was little. One of them was Amy's Eyes, which I can't find and have a worn, dog-eared copy of, and one of them was Charlotte Sometimes, which I may buy in hardback since the paperback is prohibitively expensive ($43), and it's not even a very thick book. I also remember loving Stuart Little, A Bridge to Terabithia, Beezus and Ramona, the entirety of Roald Dahl, and the entirety of Dr. Seuss when I was little.
I remember how Stuart Little was this sweet, thoughtful little book about traveling where your heart leads you, and that's why I was so appalled when this godawful feature film about an obnoxious mouse's obnoxious adventures with his gruff frenemy Snowball came out. The same thing happened with Ella Enchanted. I loved that book, I loved the clever, lively, brave protaganist and the prince with the temper and the sense of humor. I love the plantlike elves and the medley of languages and that Ella had a gift for languages. I watched the movie thinking I would see some of this, but they took the story, turned it on its ear, ripped off its proverbial limbs, and skinned it alive. Oh my god. It wasn't even a good movie, original book canon or not.
Same thing happened with the Dr. Seuss books I knew and loved- I saw the recent Horton Hears A Who film and it was a huge medley of genderfail and modernization and pop culture references and stupid humor that didn't fit Dr. Seuss's whimsical bizarreness at all. The new Grinch movie made me want to cry, but not in a good way. I didn't bother with the new Cat in the Hat movie. And part of my revulsion seems to be the moviemakers taking the story and making it more 'modern'. Not modern as in, different storytelling techniques and messing with the narrative, or assigning different values to make something less problematic. No, I'm talking about taking the characters and having them make veiled pop culture references, sing popular songs of the day, speak like modern people right down to the slang, and add a lot of tacky humor that tries too hard to be 'cool'.
I kind of feel like a crotchety geezer complaining about the kids on my lawn when I say this, but in my opinion, a movie about a book should at least convey the sentiment and tone of the book. It doesn't have to follow it to the letter- in fact, it's good to break off the beaten path, but at least give it the same structure overall, and especially don't change speech patterns to make the characters more hip.
I believe that movies lose a lot when you do that. It adds nothing to the story and serves to solidify it in the terms of a certain point in time. No one's going to get some of these references in the future, you're just cluttering up the dialogue. I watched Sleeping Beauty some time ago and liked how timeless it was, which really is what makes a classic in my opinion. Something several generations can watch without confusion.
Not all movies based on the books I liked as children have this problem, although most of them aren't very recent: Secret of NIMH was a beautiful take on Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH. It changed the original story, but not in any way that detracted from it. I remember liking the movie Matilda and the old Charlie and the Chocolate Factory movie, and I think the Narnia movies so far have done justice to the book series. In fact, I enjoyed the movie version over the book version for the treatment of the children's characters.
I feel like the difference between those movies and the ones I am criticizing is what the films are setting out to accomplish: Secret of NIMH was clearly trying to tell the story of Mrs. Frisby in the context of film as a medium, Horton Hears A Who was patronizingly catering to the child audience with off-the-wall humor and pointless chaos. Which isn't a bad moneymaking and marketing choice, I suppose, but that certainly doesn't make it a good movie or a good story.
I remember how Stuart Little was this sweet, thoughtful little book about traveling where your heart leads you, and that's why I was so appalled when this godawful feature film about an obnoxious mouse's obnoxious adventures with his gruff frenemy Snowball came out. The same thing happened with Ella Enchanted. I loved that book, I loved the clever, lively, brave protaganist and the prince with the temper and the sense of humor. I love the plantlike elves and the medley of languages and that Ella had a gift for languages. I watched the movie thinking I would see some of this, but they took the story, turned it on its ear, ripped off its proverbial limbs, and skinned it alive. Oh my god. It wasn't even a good movie, original book canon or not.
Same thing happened with the Dr. Seuss books I knew and loved- I saw the recent Horton Hears A Who film and it was a huge medley of genderfail and modernization and pop culture references and stupid humor that didn't fit Dr. Seuss's whimsical bizarreness at all. The new Grinch movie made me want to cry, but not in a good way. I didn't bother with the new Cat in the Hat movie. And part of my revulsion seems to be the moviemakers taking the story and making it more 'modern'. Not modern as in, different storytelling techniques and messing with the narrative, or assigning different values to make something less problematic. No, I'm talking about taking the characters and having them make veiled pop culture references, sing popular songs of the day, speak like modern people right down to the slang, and add a lot of tacky humor that tries too hard to be 'cool'.
I kind of feel like a crotchety geezer complaining about the kids on my lawn when I say this, but in my opinion, a movie about a book should at least convey the sentiment and tone of the book. It doesn't have to follow it to the letter- in fact, it's good to break off the beaten path, but at least give it the same structure overall, and especially don't change speech patterns to make the characters more hip.
I believe that movies lose a lot when you do that. It adds nothing to the story and serves to solidify it in the terms of a certain point in time. No one's going to get some of these references in the future, you're just cluttering up the dialogue. I watched Sleeping Beauty some time ago and liked how timeless it was, which really is what makes a classic in my opinion. Something several generations can watch without confusion.
Not all movies based on the books I liked as children have this problem, although most of them aren't very recent: Secret of NIMH was a beautiful take on Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of NIMH. It changed the original story, but not in any way that detracted from it. I remember liking the movie Matilda and the old Charlie and the Chocolate Factory movie, and I think the Narnia movies so far have done justice to the book series. In fact, I enjoyed the movie version over the book version for the treatment of the children's characters.
I feel like the difference between those movies and the ones I am criticizing is what the films are setting out to accomplish: Secret of NIMH was clearly trying to tell the story of Mrs. Frisby in the context of film as a medium, Horton Hears A Who was patronizingly catering to the child audience with off-the-wall humor and pointless chaos. Which isn't a bad moneymaking and marketing choice, I suppose, but that certainly doesn't make it a good movie or a good story.