-------Original Message------- From: JIM DOHERTY <
jimdohertyjr@yahoo.com> Sent: 08/26/03 07:11 AM To:
rara-avis@icomm.ca Subject: Re: RARA-AVIS: Books
different than movies
>
>> LA CONFIDENTIAL, for example, is not totally
faithful to Ellroy's book, but it's a very good
movie.
"Not totally faithful"? Pardon me while I guffaw ...
> [...] As for L.A.CONFIDENTIAL, given that the
massive novel had to be compressed into a feature-length
running time, it was
faithful to the spirit, if not the letter of the novel.
__________________________________
My attention has been elsewhere, of late, so forgive me if I
cover points which others have already articulated.
One of the pleasures of the "L.A. Confidential" movie is the
way Curtis Hanson & Co. recreated a plot which resembled
Ellroy's and yet managed to avoid both libel and confusion. A
very adroit piece of footwork, I'd say. But I mean ...
After all, a crucial aspect of the Ellroy novel was the 1950s
creation of Disneyland (renamed, with new names for both its
creator and its star rodent). This was connected to the
creation of Los Angeles' freeways, which Ellroy gave
something of the same importance as the Robert Towne did the
water-rights in "Chinatown." (Both crucial Los Angeles
issues, I might, as a native-born Angelean, add. Cf. the
commentary of Joan Didion.)
Then, of course, Ellroy gives renamed Disney a son who's a
serial-killer. All of this is crucial to the book. And one
could also, of course, mention that the "Kim Basinger" role
isn't nearly as large and that the father whose respect "Guy
Pearce" wishes, oh-so-sappily, to live up to, is shown by
Ellroy to have been a sell-out himself.
----------
I like the book, in all its craziness, and I like the movie,
too. But you gotta admit there are major, major
differences.
A PROPOSAL IN RESPONSE TO DOHERTIAN "BOOK/MOVIE" ISSUES
What would you say to a differentiation between "adaptation"
ad
"translation"? A "translation" can be a direct, blow-by-blow,
reproduction in film terms of what occurs in the book.
"Adaptation," by contrast," can involve changes to make the
material work in its new circumstances. Sorta like the
difference between "Messiah" involving Handel's own
orchestrations and the version put together by Mozart.
My basic feeling: They're two differing approaches. One is
not *better* than the other, they're just contrasting methods
of dealing with material-to-be-filmed.
Direct translations are very nice -- WHEN THEY WORK. But,
then, imaginative play with the material is fine, too. I love
both "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" and the Ridley
Scott/David Peoples "Blade Runner", f'rinstance ... and they
have virtually nothing to do with each other.
Chris
-- # Plain ASCII text only, please. Anything else won't show up. # To unsubscribe from the regular list, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to # majordomo@icomm.ca. This will not work for the digest version. # The web pages for the list are at http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/ .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 26 Aug 2003 EDT