Should I be Distraught or Thrilled--a worthless rant

T

TeTe

Cathlete
Just found out that one of my absolute favorite books is being made into a movie. "Love in the Time of Cholera." This could be a mess. Or, maybe it could be magnificent?? It's just such a magical book with very little dialogue...and now someone is going to make up what they THINK these amazing characters were saying??? I HATE when they ruin great books in a movie. (Any of you ever see the theatrical version of "The Sound & the Fury?" How anyone ever read that "tale told by an idiot" and thought that it would translate into film is beyond me. AND, they're remaking IT for release in 2008!!!! Who ARE these delusional souls!)

There are just some books that I feel should be left alone and "Love in the Time of Cholera" is one of them. Another is "The Confederacy of Dunces."

I never saw "Cold Mountain" because, aside from my personal opinion that Jude Law and Nicole Kidman were completely ill-cast as those two characters, from reviews that I saw they just sucked the soul out of it.

Oh, well....in the whole scheme of things, I guess it's not a big deal, but...well, YUCK.
 
I'm the same way about Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice. I refuse to see movie versions of it, and even if I did, it simply would not be possible for me to tolerate Keira Knightley as Elizabeth Bennett because she's too pretty. I think it's important part of Elizabeth's character that she's not the pretty sister, and I refuse to see it unless someone tells me that they somehow made Keira less pretty. :p :p I know, I'm a nut job. :+
 
How did I know that you'd reply to this?:p

I liked the mini-series of P & P on A&E. It was just wonderful...and some of the dialogue was verbatim. BUT, and I know they had a 2-hour time constraint, the recent movie version with Keira Knightley just didn't do it for me (I won't even tell you how they RUINED the very quiet domestic scene of Mr. Darcy telling Elizabeth that he loved her in spite of himself...the setting of that scene in the book was just as, if not more, important than some of what was said.) But, the real killer was the guy who played Darcy. I never did see a redeeming quality in him. Standing around brooding does not really capture that character at all. Now, if we could just find a way for you to see only the wonderful scenes of Donald Sutherland as Mr. Bennett and Dame Judi Dench as Lady Catherine de Bourg...

And you're not a nut job...I see your point entirely. Uh, oh, maybe you are and then...that makes..me..a.....hmmmm?
 
Oh, gosh, TeTe, Donald Sutherland and Judi Dench? They are both fabulous, and perfect for those roles! I didn't even know who was in the movie. You may have talked me into seeing it. ;)
 
RE: Should I be Distraught or Thrilled--a worthless ran...

Oh I have to chime in about P&P--I love the A&E version so much--I can watch it again and again and never grow tired of it. I love Jennifer Ehle, who plays Elizabeth (I think that's her name) and Colin Firth is just so easy on the eyes IMHO.

I didn't care for the movie version so much. It was worth seeing once, but I wouldn't watch it repeatedly like I do the other.

Maggie:)
 
RE: Should I be Distraught or Thrilled--a worthless ran...

That's why I never saw The Shipping News, one of favorite ever books.
 
RE: Should I be Distraught or Thrilled--a worthless ran...

OMG, Nancy, you have never seen the A&E version of P&P????? It is just MARVELOUS and Colin Firth makes a deliciously wonderful Mr. Darcy. (I've loved Mr. Darcy since I was about 8.) I definitely think you should see this; you won't be disappointed.

I was so-so on the newer version with Keira Knightley. I just hate that directors take so many liberties with the storyline in order to make it work in the allotted time. Blah.

Marie

PS: Just to avoid completely hijacking the thread, I read Love in the Time of Cholera a while ago and agree it is hard to see how it can successfully be translated into a dialogue-driven film.
 
RE: Should I be Distraught or Thrilled--a worthless ran...

Never read Love in the Time of Cholera but I agree with you that some books should not be made into movies. I form a picture in my mind of favorite characters (I do this a lot with Truman Capote books) and when I hear who they plan on casting for certain roles it totally ruins it for me. And, "A Confederacy of Dunces" is one of my all time favorite books. Anyone who hasn't read it yet should! It's a classic! Won a Pulitzer too!
 
RE: Should I be Distraught or Thrilled--a worthless ran...

DERAILED. Asolutely the worst book into a movie I have seen. That was one of THE best books I have read and the movie was terrible. I just can't understand how they could have cast Jennifer Anniston in that movie. I like her but....she was not meant for that role. I wish I'dnever seen the movie version. I had to explain half of the stuff they left out to my DH cuz he was clueless.
LD
 
No, don't bother. Judi Dench is fabulous in everything she does (go see Notes on a Scandal --- brilliant), but Sutherland is terrible, awful.

The long dramatization with Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle is completely worthy of the book, more than worthy in fact. See it and relish every moment of it. The man who plays Mr. Collins is as obsequious as he's supposed to be and the actress playing Lady Catherine is divine in her intolerance. The BBC recently did new productions of Persuasion, Northanger Abbey and Mansfield park. Tellingly, they left P&P well alone because no-one can improve upon Firth and Ehle.

Watch it Nancy. You will not regret it.

Clare
 
I'd stay well away from it. Most movie productions make a pigs ear of it and never approach the detail nor subtlety of the original novel. I made the mistake of seeing the "Girl with a Pearl Earring" film with Ms. Johansson when it came out. Stupid mistake. It flattened the book out. Made it banal. I refuse to see the film version of "The Divine Secrets of the Ya Ya Sisterhood" because it is one of my fave books ever and I am sure Ashley Judd ruins it. That actress is soooooo overrated. And the book IS divine!

Sorry, but how on earth can Hollywood even think about touching Marquez? Insanity. Did you see what they did to his "Cronica de una Muerte Anunciada" ("Chronicle of a Death Foretold") with Rupert Everett? Ugh!

Clare
 
<Most movie productions make a pigs ear of it>
LOL! :7
I also find this with historical films, especially military history related films. I was so excited when Pearl Harbor was due to come out....then I read what historians had to say about it and for the most part, it was regarded as really bad comedy. Speaking of which, one movie adaptation (or at least inspiration) of a book that was better than the book was Das Boot. Yes, I know. I'm weird.
 
"Love in the Time of Cholera" is one of my favorite books. I had the same reaction as you, TeTe, when I heard it was being made into a movie. My first reaction "How the hell are they gonna do that??".

ETA - I loved "Das Boot" the movie. I didn't know it was based on a book.
 
I think you should go see it & take it for what it is. Hollywood turning books into movies is always a hit or miss venture. Look at GWTW--couldn't have been any better, although many at the time thought Vivian Leigh was too pretty to play Scarlett & there were LOTS of omissions from the book.

Or The Shining (yeah I know, King ain't no Mitchell, but still........there are actually college classes on his books alone!). Followed the book almost verbatim & scared the crap outta me. Although I don't know what that movie would've been like w/o Nicholson, who seemed born for the role..........

Or back to literature.....Vanity Fair......loved the movie & it followed the book fairly well. I never would've pegged Reese Witherspoon as Becky Sharp but she did OK with it. It could've been better but I love those period pieces.

Schindler's List, Sophie's Choice.......do I need to even elaborate?

Be optomistic--if nothing else it'll be entertaining. :)
 
I love that book. Delicious and such a good read. I can totally see it as a art house film. One of those where you wonder why exactly they made this but you love it anyway.

Having read Cold Mountain and seen the movie I will tell you to reconsider. The movie is really SOOO well done and does bring all those characters to love. Renee Zellwenger(sp?) is wonder but the stars are those beautiful North Carolina hills (although they subs in the ones in the Urkaine)and the beautiful scenery. I loved it.

KIM
 
De acuerdo, books are always better than the movies. That being said, García Márquez is advising in the making of this movie
 
I thought Sandra Bullock was worse. Ahem she is so not southern. That movie was soooooo disappointing compared to the book.
LD
 
"books are always better than the movies"

Usually, but not always. "Bridges of Madison County" and "Last of the Mohicans" come to mind. Oh, and "The Graduate."
 
Elizabeth Bennett was not the "pretty sister" but I don't believe she was described as 'not pretty'. It's just that Jane was considered the prettiest.

Jennifer Ehle I think was perfectly cast as Elizabeth in the A&E version. The actress playing Jane (Susannah something-or-other) I felt was not necessarily prettier, but more "classically pretty" for the tastes/fashion of the time (1700s).

And one can never get enough of Colin Firth. YUMMMM!!

I never saw the Keira Knightly version. Because after Colin Firth, what else is there? hee-hee. Plus I never pictured Elizabeth Bennett as having an underbite.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Our Newsletter

Get awesome content delivered straight to your inbox.

Top