Re: Book into film
Camille Scaysbrook (verona_beach@geocities.com)
Mon, 08 Jun 1998 18:38:00 +1000
Ohhh boy. Very touchy ground here. Just as a starter, as one a little
experienced in the area of copyright, I know that Salinger's estate (and
whoever he names executor) will be in the possession of the rights to all
of his works for at least fifty years after his death (as D. has already
pointed out). Which means at the very earliest you'll have Catcher on the
screens by summer 2048 (hopefully much later).
As both a screen, stage and prose writer myself, I'm *very* careful to see
my work is shown in the best light. I mightily doubt that after 30 odd
years of silence his executors would simply let the floodgates open to
whoever comes first. Remember also that the reason Salinger has eschewed
the movies and movie adaptations of his work is the sentimental hatchet job
they did on `Uncle Wiggily In Conneticut' (`My Foolish Heart') - after that
I'm fairly sure you'd have to do a lot of talking to convince he or his
representatives that a movie is a good idea (nobody's sure anymore if he
even thinks `Hapworth 16' is a good idea' ...)
It's interesting you nominate `Franny and Zooey' as the most viable work -
I'd say Franny definitely, but I certainly couldn't see, for example, that
lengthy, lengthy scene with Bessie and Zooey in the bathroom translating
well. I think a stage production would be interesting though (almost but
not quite as unlikely - JDS once stated way back in the 50's that he'd like
to do a play of `Catcher' with himself as Holden - wouldn't that have been
something ???) especially given the theatrical impulse at the core of much
of his work, for example, the Glass family.
> Besides, they'd
> probably cast Leonardo DiCaprio (I don't care if I spelled that wrong)
> as Holden. Enough of my ramblings, what do you think?
Funny ... we had a string that went along the lines of `Who would you cast
to play ...' not long ago here. And Leo DiCaprio's name came up a couple of
times as a viable Holden. Go watch `What's Eating Gilbert Grape' if you
don't believe me.
As for the films ... I say we restrict them to our own individual
imaginations, because if anyone did bring them to the screen we'd spend the
whole movie going `Oh, but that's not how *I* imagined it!' We talk about
`It's be good in the right hands' - but no hand will be totally right and
perfect to our own visions but our own. That's the beauty of literature -
you give and create so much to activate the magic of the text that it in
essence becomes your story as much as the author's, whereas film tends to
predetermine things to a much larger extent. Also,
Salinger's writing is so literary and evocative that it couldn't help but
lose a lot in the translation from book to film.
That's not to say film isn't a valid medium ... I believe quite the
opposite. JDS himself is even said to have a huge collection of movies of
the 40's and 50's of which he is a connoisser. I'm just saying it's a very
different medium, almost to the point of mutual exclusivity. The best
movies tend to be the ones conceived especially for film; that you could
not imagine in any other medium. The same goes for books, radio plays,
stage plays et al. Thus, what would be *really* interesting (and probably
even less likely) would be that he wrote a screenplay. I strongly doubt it,
though it'd be nice ...
Camille
verona_beach@geocities.com
@ THE ARTS HOLE
www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Theater/6442