Subject: Catcher movie (was Re: FOR BERND WAHLBRINCK et al)
From: Suzanne Morine (suzannem@dimensional.com)
Date: Sat Dec 30 2000 - 00:01:20 GMT
At 11:41 AM 12/28/2000 +0100, you wrote:
>PS for those who are interested, the poll is in #5 of the EXTERNAL
>ASPECTS. url:
>http://mitglied.tripod.de/BerndWahlbrinck/ext.htm
There are some interesting themes in those 50 comments. Art versus commerce
versus restriction and logistical problems with a movie version of the
book. Here are quotes I found interesting.
"It would be life imitating art. Like the concept of a play within a play
in Shakespeare's Hamlet. We would be dopes watching Holden call us dopes."
"A movie could never handle the stream of consciousness technique
(digressions!) that make the Catcher so much fun to read."
"What is great in the novel is untranslatable into images. Shots of a young
man wandering around New York with a voice over."
"Film is another art form. A film can not do what a novel can, neither can
a novel do what a film can. "Purists" need to get over it."
"holden didn't like the type of movies done back then but i think that he
would enjoy the ones done now, such as the independent films and others."
"they'd get some phony bastard to star probably, like that pauly shore guy,
and then it'd turn into a godamned buddy comedy with a car chase scene."
"The movie could never portray all of Holden's thoughts that we read in the
movie. Besides, the book is always better."
"Good luck getting a 16 year old to act."
"I can't imagine what Holden looks like, but I don't want someone to tell
me what he looks like."
Suzanne, who did not comment
-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 18:02:58 GMT