Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC
Except for one book made into a movie that stands out in my mind, my disappointment is that I picture the people I'm reading about when I read the book and if they cast an actor that I consider really off for that character I pictured, I'm usually disappointed. The casting isn't wrong. I just pictured a completely different type when I was reading.
Unrelated, I thought the book "Six Days of The Condor" was excellent/very exciting. So what does Hollywood do? They make a movie based on the book and call it "Three Days of The Condor." Jeez, that's the way to kill a movie before it even opens in the theater - announce you're shaving 3 days off the story right there in the movie title.
|
Apparently this is a recurring phenomena that some of the best writers and playwrights have long struggled with in productions of their work. Eugene O'Neil was an infamously harsh critic upon the performances of his plays and invariably deflated with the end results. They never seemed to live up to the expectations of the play that he himself held onto in his mind.
He would become increasingly irritable and difficult with his demands. For 'A Moon For The Misbegotten' he argued furiously with Lawrence Langner, complaining that Jim Tyrone wasn't enough of a gentleman whereas Langer insisted that the actor playing the role (James Dunn) was playing it "as he head written it". What's more Eugene O'Neil insisted that all the directors and actors should be of Irish descent. These rigid demands went further when he asked an actress to put on a substantial amount of weight for the role of Josie Hogan.
I guess once a writer passes over creative control of his work to a director it is up to their discretion how faithful they are to the book, play or even screenplay they are interpreting. Screenplay writing tends to be a thankless task. If it's a bad film they blame the screenplay and if it's a great film the director takes 100% of the credit and there is rarely a mention of the screenplay writer in the review.
Plays are obviously less detached from their creators than films. I can't remember who said this but one playwright once said that plays were far more kindred spirits of poetry and even music than other forms of literature.
Although someone as perfectionist as Eugene O'Neil would have bordered on intolerable for unreasonable demands I can see where he was coming from. Sometimes I get irritable myself at certain productions or television dramas of plays and books. And as someone who was underwhelmed by the Lee Marvin film of 'the Iceman Cometh' (Rocky was too old, and Larry not animated enough and the rest of the characters just weren't as interesting as they read in the book) I can't think what he would have made of that version fine though it was with Lee Marvin putting in a decent performance. I think he would have been pleased with David Suchet's performance in 'Long Day's Journey Into Night' though even if he isn't Irish.
Charles Dickens television adaptations are usually highly praised by critics. However I've never watched one that ever came close to the book. The BBC made a perfectly fine Dickens adaptation of 'Great Expectations' last Christmas (not this one just gone) but it portrayed everything with such an unbearably straight face and plucked so much of the humour out of the plot that it marred my enjoyment of what was otherwise a very slick production.
I can easily become extremely prejudicial to any film adaptation where the main character is such a departure from the written text as to make my enjoyment of the performance or film untenable.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
).
.
