I was re-reading Sean's comment from August 5 concerning the mannerist connection to "A Clockwork Orange" (I don't think so, but the subject's up for discussion after we see "Bastards") and I thought I'd like to start an ongoing list of movies that are better than their source material. Let me say right here that this is not film criticism, this is just for fun, or just stupid, depending on whether you're in the mood or not. You don't need a fancy degree to know that comparing media is a waste of time and critically unsupportable. (But, and this is a big but, that's what makes movie music so interesting: the tension between what you see and what you hear. Brakhage knew this, and that's why his movies are (really) silent.)
"A Clockwork Orange" tops the list. And, I'll admit, Anthony Burgess is one of my favorite authors, but his novel is really mediocre. It's the film that's great. And "Singin' in the Rain" is not mentioned in the book.
Another one is "The Searchers" by John Ford. The book is awful. Although I think that may hold true for any Ford source material.
And any Hitchcock source material too. Even "The Birds" is just a creepy short story by a good author (Daphne du Maurier) made into a great movie.
I'm so old that I remember when "The Godfather" was a book: a bestseller by Mario Puzo... it seemed like everyone in my family was reading it. And the book is OK, but...
Finally, there's West Side Story. If we put aside the quality of the acting in the movie, I have to admit that I like all the cuts and all the changes they made to whip that movie into shape (152 minutes running time). I think Mike disagrees with me on this, but I'd like hear if there are any specific changes that stand out as bad decisions....
have you seen the nicholas cage movie adaptation? the first thing that came to mind when i read the premise of this entry - although the movie is hardly based on the book i suppose.
ReplyDeletei might add fight club to the list -- i think the casting really adds to the characters -- although the book is much darker and lacks the semi-happy ending.
i think i might also suggest lord of the rings.... even though they're not the tightest movies, the movies really do a good job at stripping most of the fluff from tolkien's writing while still capturing the story pretty spot on.
with regard to WSS -- i think i agree with you for the most part. the dream ballet sequence in the play dates itself and doesn't do much for the plot, the movie makes the prologue is 10x more exciting, and swapping "cool" with "officer krupke" might work better dramatically -- having a funny number like krupke in an otherwise miserable act 2 is a pretty strange move.
i will say one change they made is unforgivable though -- in the play, "i feel pretty" opens act 2, and in the movie it's buried in act 1 somewhere. the last image of act 1 is the dead bodies of riff and bernardo, and all hell is breaking loose, so when maria starts act 2 by singing "i feel pretty," the lyrics are ironic and her naivete is fascinating to watch. but in the movie, the song has none of the ironic undertones and is essentially useless. plus, now we have to deal with everyone thinking the lyrics are "i feel pretty and witty and gay" instead of "witty and bright", because they had to rhyme with "day" instead of "night" to accommodate the change.
Tonight (Friday 11pm PBS) - Tarentino on Charlie Rose talking about Inglourious Basterds.
ReplyDelete