If only I got to write papers like this. If only.

[nedlum]

So. Let's talk about literature

Comments

[julesrbf]

Ok, I admit that, most unfortunately, I did not read this whole thing. I did see my username, though, and read that paragraph. (I am a horrible lj friend, sorry.) The reason that it is justifiable to say that the movie is worse is because it was completely untruthful to the book. I don't care how good a movie it actually could have been (which, even if I hadn't read the book, I don't think it was)...the fact is that it is supposed to be the movie version of a classic novel, and about the only thing true to the book are the names of the characters. They are comparable because they share the same name, the same characters, the same (I use the word "same" very, very loosely in this instance) general plot outline (dude wrongly accused, goes to prison, escapes, seeks vengeance).

[nedlum]

I agree. Certainly, as the goddess of my idolatry points out, the two largest changes that the transfer to the screen ungergo are the removal of greys, and the weakening of 19th century social restrictions in which unmarried people did not have sex on the beach because it just wasn't done.

I'm just not sure that the film was an outright failure taken on its own terms, and taking it on its own terms is probably the better choice for an adaptation which departs so wildly from those of the book. But then, it's been a long while since I saw it, and I've little real inclination to watch it again. So I don't think I can effectivly debate it.

Thanks for commenting, anyway.