Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
I thought it would feel bigger.
I enjoyed the novel, but I really can't see it translating brilliantly to film -- I can imagine there'd be some wicked cinematography and individual scenes, but I can't see the unorthodox narrative being adapted as well into cinema
Currently half way through Blood Meridian. Pretty disturbing stuff
considering the director did Motorcycle Diaries I was expecting more expansive cinematography.
It also has an unreal amount of shagging for a 15.
yeah, not seen On the Road.....ummmm.....bye!
if that counts
arse out pumping in movies
it's so smooth
it was better than On The Road
haven't seen the film
read the book, i liked it
is definitely more becoming of a novel than a film, it never quite takes off the way I thought it could. I guess I expected the film to be more meditative and 'poetically' shot than it was.
To be honest, even though I didn't know they shared a director until after I'd seen On The Road, I thought it would be closer in style to Motorcycle Diaries than it was.
Still if you like other people's sex noise and the idea of Steve Buscemi getting bummed then this is definitely the film for you.
so up for that
As soon as Walter Salles was announced it was obvious it was going to be humdrum. Motorcycle Diaries was OK, nice looking, but it was obviously not going to work with Kerouac's prose. All the energy and hyper-realness of the novel is gone.
Sam Riley seems to make a habit of trashing cherished cultural landmarks (Control, Brighton Rock). Stewart is gormless. Hedlund is not bad but he's not exciting. You just don't give a fuck about any of them.
I don't remember thinking that when I had a go at reading the book
about them, whereas with this film there's a lot of sentimentalising-they have to give the characters some kind of arc/change.
But it's probably 'cos the actors/script/director don't have any of the charm.
Agree with you not giving a fuck about them, actually, and that's probably the one big difference with the book and the film.
In the book he goes to great lengths to endear the characters to you, even despite the strange and horrible things they do and say to eachother. The film doesn't really bother. Or have time.
As a fan of the book I predicted I'd hate it.
But they actually didn't fuck it up at all, really. It would have been so easy to get wrong and ruin and totally miss the point of, but I think Salles didn't do any of those things.
Instead he cast it well and created a fitting atmosphere for the film. It's never going to be exactly how you imagine it in your head, and more often than not, it's going to be horribly different to your view of it. But as I said, they didn't fuck it up. Dean and MaryLou are cast well and it looks authentic.
I think it could've been longer. 'The road' itself doesn't really get much time. Most of it is given to their meetings and stuff, which is only to be expected I spose. But that was the only thing I think was slightly missing from the film.
With certain adaptations, I really don't want to watch them because of what influence they'll have on my take of the book - I'm not going anywhere near that horrific interpretation of The Great Gatsby, for example. But for people who like the book, I'd recommend going to see On The Road.
that could be travelling time they've cut down on
Enjoyed it far more than I thought I would.