Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

This means war....

Okay, first go and read my friend andrewducker's post on the new Hollywood take on the greatest book ever The Three Musketeers.

Watched it? Okay.

All right, that's it, Hollywood, I'm taking away your X-Box. And your Wii. And your trousers. You only get them back when you learn to Respect The Bloody Books. You're turning Miss Marple into an American sex-pot, too, I gather. You ruined The Little White Horse with sparkly sentiment and cloying faux Englishness. You don't get to play in the European literary sand box any more.



Mar. 30th, 2011 09:59 am (UTC)
Being serious for a bit, I think we can be a bit over-protective of books if we're not careful. James Bond is not Scottish. The hero of The Ipcress File comes from Burnley, not London. Planet of the Apes, apart from the final scene, does not take place on Earth. The Odyssey is not set in the 1930s American South. Great Expectations does not end with Pip tearing down the drapes at Satis House. Soylent Green is not people. Yet I've enjoyed films that have taken those sort of liberties with their source material. Even the first two Lester movies, the best screen adaptation of the novel I've seen, take liberties with the source material, simplifying the political complexity, adding humour and killing Rochefort.

Of course, that doesn't mean I think this movie will be any good, though with an original script by Andrew Davies it had the potential to be (I suspect the flying ships are not his idea, but come from rewrites by Anderson and Alex Litvak).
Mar. 30th, 2011 12:58 pm (UTC)
Even more amusing, the name of the hero of The Ipcress File et seq "... is not Harry and never has been." (I think the quote comes from Funeral in Berlin but it's a long time since I read them. However, this factoid amused me at the time.

Mar. 31st, 2011 03:37 pm (UTC)
I don't mind some liberties -- the Lester films are a good example, as is Valmont (a lower budget version of Les Liaisons Dangereuses which came out around the same timeas the Glenn Close version, which I found static, and which took considerable liberties with the plot while being much truer to the spirit). What I mind is the 'throw it out and redo it' attitude that seems to prevail sometimes. And I don't have as much faith as you in Davies, as he has form on speaking of his ability to 'improve' books he's adapted, which is I find a little arrogant. I don't want line-by-line fidelity, but a bit more care, attention and respect -- and less Americanisation, sometimes -- would be nice.
Mar. 31st, 2011 03:52 pm (UTC)
Fair enough. And yes, Davies is an arrogant sod (though with some reason to be), but I think the more jaw-dropping nonsense in that trailer (will Orlando Bloom actually twirl his moustache?) is nothing to do with him.

Latest Month

October 2016


Page Summary

Powered by LiveJournal.com