There was an idea stuck on my head in this week. I went with some of my friends in the theater and we saw a movie. The movie was "Ana Karenina" inspired by the book of Leo Tolstoy. As the movie started I started to dislike it. The choice of the actors was awful. I want to speak for the main character Ana interpreted by Keira Knightley. She tried to emphasize the gestures of nobility of that time but she looked ridiculous. She was about to smile in an attractive way and what she does, a duck-face. It is not personal but just to introduce my idea. 

As I see today many books are ruined by these "post-modernism" movies To me that I have read plenty of books who are being today movies is a big delusion from the cinematography. They keep ruining books. I can't say that all movies are rubbish but those who makes millions of dollars of income aren't that satisfying. My friends I wanted to share my opinion and to know yours about these kind of abomination.   

Views: 133

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I remember seeing the first part of the film adaptation of Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness.  The book was beautifully written, sending the reader into a deep, dark jungle, with strange things lurking about just beyond sight; terrible atrocities, lazy, depressing cruelty upon an undeserving people.  When Marlow spoke, I felt that I, too, was on the River Thames with him, listening to him in that darkness.

To say the film was a poor representation of the book is a vast understatement.

Yeah the same idea got stuck at my head. They spend a lot of money and work in a poor representation. 

In drama studies, one of the things they stress to both the actors and the playwrighting students is that the theatre of the imagination is always greater than anything that can be put on stage or screen, and it is essentially true.  One can always imagine things that are hindered by something in the material world.  That's why cinema and theatre are never as good as the book.

Can you expand on what you mean by "post-modernism" movies as well as what you mean by a "big delusion from the cinematography?

Movies aren't here to make the lover of the individual book love it more, they are there to introduce it to a broader audience in a totally different medium.

  Hello Bruno

  I'm not sure if you've seen the discussion we're having on the changes from book to movie in John Carter, but it's much along the lines of what you're talking about. It's not an identical subject because we're talking about recent film incarnations of pulp novels, but you might find it interesting.  I started it because of my frustration with the modernization and softening up the protagonist. Some of the responses had some great insight.

    At times though, modernization and anachronistic behavior is what some people want.  My darling wife for example, is a middle ages fan and loves the old Heath Ledger movie; A Knight's Tale.  It's not a bad flick, and it's anachronisms are intentional.  A much more fitting view of Knights in action however, was the movie Ironclad, which she didn't make it past the first few uses of that Zwiehander.   

  As Shields said above, the real flavor of any book is bound to be altered to introduce it to a wider film audience. It is, after all, a money making industry, and they are keeping the concerns of the average viewer (who probably hasn't read the associated book). Thus the "action" added to the Hobbit, and the songs and feasts taken out of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. They were popped in, or taken out to make would hopefullly be a better movie.   

   In short, some of us will always be dissapointed with certain incarnations of book to film translation.  We're at the mercy of the director and cast to bring our stories to life.  That being said, thanks for the warning about Karenina, Keira was the crush of my misspent youth, I wouldn't want the duckface to ruin her!

                                                             Sam

RSS

Latest Activity

N. Vest replied to D L's discussion Should people marry? It seems that God would forbid it.
"Well that is the crux isn't seeing as you're not supposed to be having the one with out the other. . ."
7 minutes ago
Jim posted a discussion

Any books on tribalism?

Hey y'all, been discussing Tribalism with my wife after really reading Daniel Quinn's Beyond Civilization and I was wondering if anyone could recommend other books on the subject/movement?
32 minutes ago
Chatmonkey replied to Ramsay Bolton's discussion Zombie Thread
"Surprisingly never actually thought about this even after watching a tonne of Walking Dead. I'm fairly athletic so the only way I get caught is if they jump me somehow or corner me. As I am alone and have no family in my current country (US -…"
1 hour ago
Jay D replied to Shane's discussion Ignorance of the Law is No Excuse... in the group The Great Debate
"There have to be some absolute bars on when evidence can be used. And that is normaly when it is attained illegal. Evrybody has to hide something, you might not but i for sure have broken some laws and i know of others here who did so to. Like…"
1 hour ago
Michael D. Denny replied to Christian Schmidt's discussion Let's Have A Spoiled Christmas
"What is it with you and Lexus, kid? While I've never owned one, I've driven a sad many one as a car salesman at Joe Pecheles auto, and they're junk. I'd never buy one because I've better sense than to buy a 30k car and pay…"
1 hour ago
Jay D replied to Shane's discussion Ignorance of the Law is No Excuse... in the group The Great Debate
""When I need any advice from you on how or what I should post I'll be sure to ask."  This"
2 hours ago
Jay D replied to Shane's discussion Ignorance of the Law is No Excuse... in the group The Great Debate
"Didnt ask for it, but you still can present the discussion without doing it. Its just common decency to put some effort in if you expect others to do the same."
2 hours ago
Sean O' updated their profile photo
2 hours ago

© 2014   Created by Brett McKay.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service