Re: The Catcher in the Rye movie
TheSecretGoldfish (lime6@rocketmail.com)
Wed, 01 Apr 1998 14:25:40 -0800 (PST)
ingmar bergman said that film has nothing to do with
literature.
---erin sanders <amaranth@mailcity.com> wrote:
>
> >YES YES YES ! I totally agree - Kubrick's
adaptations suck.
> this is ironic, considering kubrick's best known
movies are adaptations--the shining,
> 2001, a clockwork orange. but i cannot fathom
kubrick's interpretation of citr; i
> think i'd hate it.
> as for who could play holden accurately, my vote is
for tobey maguire. he was in
> the ice storm and portrayed a confused, quiet,
hyperintelligent and cynical boy with
> grace and utter humility. he's real cute, too.
> really, tho, any celluloid adaptation of citr would
probably create a media frenzy
> and overall hysteria. the only
movie-based-on-a-book i enjoyed was what's eating
> gilbert grape, and still i thoroughly disliked the
ending they tacked onto it.
>
> let's face it, some books just should not be made
into movies. it would have to be
> perfect, and the chances of that are slim by
definition.
>
> erin
>
>
>
>
> Get your FREE, private e-mail
> account at http://www.mailcity.com
>
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com