These are the archived discussions. To participate in active "Talk Literature" discussions go to the
homepage of ReadLiterature
Back To "Talk Literature" Archives
Finally... a movie worth seeing!
Posted by Dave on 13/3/2002, 4:14:02
This evening I went to see The Count Of Monte Cristo. What an excellent movie... all lovers of great "story" ought to catch it while it's in the theatre on the big screen. I haven't read the gargantuan original Alexandre Dumas novel, but I'm sure Hollywood had some good source material to work from, because this movie was intense from start to finish. So many twists and turns, surprises... "aha" moments. Fine acting from an all NON-star cast! Thee "classic" story on revenge! (I pre-apologize to Michael for my choice of adjective).
Posted by Lale on 13/3/2002, 12:04:40, in reply to "Finally... a movie worth seeing!"
You mean Gerard Depardieu was not in it? He did play in the French make movie a few years ago. I hadn't heard about this new Hollywood version.
I did read the book, however ... I swear I did not see it was "abridged", I would never, knowingly, buy an abridged book. I realized half-way through that this was not the original version. And whoever edited it, he/she was bad bad bad. The book was going from one previously unmentioned name to another, jumping from topic to topic (obviously they cut tens of pages every here and there, at random), it was wild.
Ok, here I got up and found the book, here it is, for you to avoid: Translated and abridged by Lowell Bair - By Bantam Books.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Posted by Len Fehskens on 13/3/2002, 17:53:32, in reply to "Finally... a movie worth seeing!"
>This evening I went to see The Count Of Monte Cristo. What an excellent movie
I saw it this past weekend. I also greatly enjoyed it. It was a nice change from the previous weekend's movie, "In the Bedroom"...
>Fine acting from an all NON-star cast!
Well, Jim Cavaziel (Frequency) and Guy Pierce (LA Confidential, Memento, The Time Machine) might disagree with you.
Gonna have to read the book (unabridged) now.
Posted by Guillermo Maynez on 15/3/2002, 1:42:15, in reply to "Re: Finally... a movie worth seeing!"
What do you people mean you haven´t read the book! It's one of the most entertaining, exciting, and wonderful story ever written. What does it matter if it's long, if you won't want it to end. After all, reading a story like this equals reading several books, and we are supposed to like to read. I thoroughly recommend it to you, of course in the unabdridged version. I can no think of any of you not liking it.
Posted by Chris on 15/3/2002, 6:12:28, in reply to "Re: Finally... a movie worth seeing!"
I too enjoyed this movie version; actually I went to see it a second time a few days ago. It's nice that such a wonderful story has finally been given a proper cinematic treatment, after several mediocre versions.
I particularly liked that the tone of the movie kept with the book in being dark, brooding, and vengeful. Other movie iterations of the story have cast it as being a fun, swashbuckling adventure, and lessened the single-minded revenge motivating Dantes. The book, while certainly an adventure, isn't what I would call a "fun" story, and I liked that the movie folks got it right.
Posted by len on 15/3/2002, 15:21:49, in reply to "Re: Finally... a movie worth seeing!"
>What do you people mean you haven´t read the book!
I have already ordered a copy (hardbound, unabridged) from Amazon. And The Three Musketeers as well.
Posted by Lale on 15/3/2002, 16:02:15, in reply to "Re: Finally... a movie worth seeing!"
My upstairs neighbor (French) tells me that it is not possible to truly understand the French without reading The Three Musketeers. He says that the book captures the essence of the French.
Have any of you seen the movie, The Man in the Iron Mask? Lousy movie. The reason I bring it up is that The Three Muskeeters (plus, of course, Dartagnan) have a predominant role in there; and one of them was played by Gerard Depardieu. France did not like this hollywood version at all. They said that the only character played by a real French (Depardieu) was portrayed as a sex-crazed man and that was an insulting stereotype.
Posted by len on 15/3/2002, 16:31:24, in reply to "Re: Finally... a movie worth seeing!"
>My upstairs neighbor (French) tells me that it is not possible to truly understand the French without reading The Three Musketeers.
I thought you lived on the top floor. Would that make your "upstairs neighbor" someone celestial?
Posted by Lale on 15/3/2002, 17:23:09, in reply to "Re: Finally... a movie worth seeing!"
No, we live on the 9th floor, the last from the top. There is 10th floor. But since he is French, he might be considered celestial.
In the elevator there is no button for 10th floor, you access it via a key. Only another reason for my neighbor to feel celestial.
Posted by Dave on 16/3/2002, 0:14:04, in reply to "Re: Finally... a movie worth seeing!"
Hi all: Wow, who would have thought that there were so many Dumas-mongers in the woodwork! I would never have imagined that my simple comment about the movie would have stimulated so much discussion, but this is great. Now I know a bit more about Dumas, and the generally favorable comments about his writing have led me to a certain unread book on my shelf. Last fall I picked up a beautiful hardcover unabridged and ILLUSTRATED copy of "The Three Musketeers" at a used book sale. The price?
And that's a CANADIAN dollar friends... which is really like saying about 62 cents! Amazing! I love used book sales, which continue to convince me that "one man's junk is another man's treasure." Just the other day I received a profound illustration of this fact. I met up with my building superintendent down in the parking garage. He told me that, in the adjoining building (trivia: a building in which rocker Alanis Morrissette lives)... he recently found the big garbage bin LITERALLY stuffed with books. An entire library someone had thrown out. He said most of it was all sloppy because of the other garbage that had been thrown on top of the book mountain, but among the gems he snagged out of there was a hardcover series of the complete works of J.D. Salinger! Can you imagine that someone would throw something like that in the garbage? I had to tell him to stop talking because I was getting nauseous.
Posted by Anna van Gelderen on 16/3/2002, 10:08:26, in reply to "Re: Finally... a movie worth seeing!"
So far I have not been able to do that. There are several books of trash I bought 20 years ago and will never read, so it is useless to let them take up valuable shelf space. But so far all I have been able to do is stow them in a box. First I kept the box in my study, but now I have managed to put it in a closet with other things I can't seem to throw out.
Posted by Lale on 16/3/2002, 16:41:46, in reply to "throwing out books"
Nice bargain on that Alexandre Dumas book, Dave! I have always believed in "one person's trash is another person's treasure" theory.
I think this is what happens: an elderly person dies and his/her relatives who empty the place have no time to sift through what is to be kept and what is to be given away, they simply throw everything out. They should of course take the time to give the books to a local library or to a school or something. Especially if there are nice books like hardcovers of J. D. Salinger.
I imagine a family, husband, wife, kids, jobs, plenty of responsibilities, chores and worries. There are minimum 4 elderly people related to them. They deal with the ailments and finacial matters and resting homes of their elderlies. Then the elderlies start dying one after the other. What are the husband and wife to do? They go to the residence of the late parent and clean it out. The easiest thing is to just throw everything out. It is a shame, but sometimes people can be totally overwhelmed with all the responsibilities.
How's that for a story? Realistic?
Or maybe they were just irresponsible, insensitive, lazy people who had no respect for books or for people who needed books, and dumped them into trash without guilt or regret.
> So far I have not been able to do that.
> There are several books of trash I bought
> 20 years ago and will never read, so it is
> useless to let them take up valuable shelf space.
Some books are not worth the paper they are printed on and deserve to be in the trash bin. Even so, I take them to a local used book store and sell them for 10-20 cents each (that is Canadian cents and makes 6.2-12.4 US cents), maybe someone else will find some value in them.
Posted by len on 18/3/2002, 15:21:29, in reply to "Re: throwing out books"
>Then the elderlies start dying one after the other. What are the husband and wife to do? They go to the residence of the late parent and clean it out. The easiest thing is to just throw everything out.
This is why those of us with large personal libraries need to make the appropriate provisions for their disposition in our wills.
Posted by Mike Dunlap on 23/3/2002, 3:05:12, in reply to "Re: Finally... a movie worth seeing!"
I don't see how anyone who's read "The Count of Monte Cristo" could think this movie was worth seeing. Sure, as far as modern movies go, in this commercial, Hollywood world, it's average or slightly better... but in comparison to Dumas's classic novel, the movie is laughable. There are many points I could give to show the silliness of the movie in comparison to the book (major characters left out, critical parts brushed over or skipped entirely, etc.), but the ending of the movie alone says all that needs to be said.
I'll put it this way... there is a Simpsons episode where Lisa volunteers at the old folks' home. While there, she entertains them with old movies, and at one point the elderly residents are seen watching the end of "Gone With the Wind." In the Simpsons version, Rhett says to Scarlett, in that most famous of scenes, "Frankly my dear... I love you, let's get married!" The nursing home residents sigh approvingly and clap happily at this dubbed-in, peaceful ending. The makers of this latest "Count of Monte Cristo" movie, as did Lisa Simpson with her viewers, clearly figured that a modern audience just couldn't handle the original, powerful ending. And... they were probably right; which is sad because in this mangling of the novel, the entire moral of the story is butchered and destroyed.
Posted by Lale on 23/3/2002, 11:52:13, in reply to "Re: Finally... a movie worth seeing!"
I don't know if they are under estimating the majority of the viewers or if they are rightly guessing that the mainstream always wants a happy ending, but they do do alter the ends of the books.
They did it with The Name of The Rose. Christian Slater went home with the girl. That was not the ending of the book. They always hollywoodize a little, à la Lisa Sympson.
Posted by len on 25/3/2002, 18:41:36, in reply to "Re: Finally... a movie worth seeing!"
>I don't see how anyone who's read "The Count of Monte Cristo" could think this movie was worth seeing.
This raises a whole host of questions about movies whose screenplay is based on an existing work. Must the purpose of such a movie be a perfect translation of the text to film? What latitude does a director have? Are you offended by a violation of some implied "truth in advertising" contract? I.e., "this movie is *not* 'The Count of Monte Cristo'", and shouldn't be given the same title? Fidelity to the original does not seem to be highly valued in Hollywood, but without justifying some of the hatchet jobs I've seen, I do have to acknowledge that cinema and literature are fairly different media and what works well in the latter may be ponderous and ineffective in the former.
Posted by Lale on 27/3/2002, 11:58:22, in reply to "Re: Finally... a movie worth seeing!"
: This raises a whole host of questions about
: movies whose screenplay is based on
: an existing work. Must the purpose of
: such a movie be a perfect translation of
: the text to film? What latitude does a
: director have? Are you offended by a
: violation of some implied "truth in
: advertising" contract? I.e.,
: "this movie is *not* 'The Count of
: Monte Cristo'", and shouldn't be given
: the same title? Fidelity to the
: original does not seem to be highly valued in
: Hollywood, but without justifying some of the
: hatchet jobs I've seen, I do have to
: acknowledge that cinema and literature
: are fairly different media and what works
: well in the latter may be ponderous and
Len, well put. I always tell myself that movies and books are different mediums, and I ask myself to accept the limitations and offerings of both when I go to see a movie of a book I've read. So, I have been thinking about your questions, do I feel betrayed, and is it the use of the title.
First let me point out that I can never resist the temptation of watching the movie of a book I've read. In fact I go out looking for it in video stores that rent older or more obscure movies. We have talked about movie vs book in this area before (see the "archives", number 8 is our previous chat on this topic) and I think it was Anna who said "I want to see how they interpreted it". One reason for seeking out the movie is that the good movie makers research the period and provide us with some of the details we don't see in the book, architecture, clothes etc. Another reason is to see how my imagination compares to the movie maker's imagination. And there must be other reasons, in short I am drawn to the movie of the books I've read.
Now, back to the questions: I understand why all of the details, events, characters in the book may not be present in the movie. I am fine with that. I also understand when they combine two events into one. I do not, however, forgive the change of the plot. Or the ending. Sometimes they (in the movie) pad an additional, and ultimately "happy" scene after the book's story ends. Or change the ending completely. That is not acceptable.
And yes, I think it is because they call it with the title of the book. Of course they say "based on the book by" but I think "based on" does not allow you to change the plot.
We read The Tin Drum and then we rented a movie called The Tin Drum (based on the book by Gunther Grass). Well, the movie ended at the one thirds of the book! Very accurate movie but contains only one third of the book. What do you do with that? I think they should have called it "The Tin Drum - Based on One Thirds of the Book by Gunther Grass". Or "The Tin Drum Trilogy - Part One".
Posted by Guillermo Maynez on 27/3/2002, 2:23:23, in reply to "Re: Finally... a movie worth seeing!"
What horror! I have not seen the movie (it's due in Mexico in a couple of weeks) but I am very much disheartened to hear that they changed the ending. These hollywood people always do it and I hate it. Of course, to produce a very faithful account of so large a book is entirely impossible,and so it happens that those who see the movie never get it right completely, because so much is missing.
Shame to the dumb people at Hollywood who think about the audience as basically composed by bland, silly and mentally-lazy people (or are they right?)
Posted by len on 27/3/2002, 15:32:00, in reply to "Re: Finally... a movie worth seeing!"
>Shame to the dumb people at Hollywood who think about the audience as basically composed by bland, silly and mentally-lazy people (or are they right?)
Yes, basically they're right. With few, rare exceptions, most people who see a movie based on a classic book have not read and likely never will read the book. So the producers and directors see it as just raw material for them to start from.
Curiously, two of those rare exceptions occurred recently, and the movies made from the books were not only faithful but excellent adaptations -- the Harry Potter movie, and The Lord of The Rings movie.