« Levenger goes off to college | Main | Bernie’s Bag and the Boston Public Library »

January 02, 2008


J. Mauldin Heiner

I wasn't going to comment until I saw _The Last of the Mohicans_ come up. I was so stunned by Bernie's comment, I had to go see if there were another movie version that might be better than the one I saw. And there is another version, but no--the Mann version is the one I remember.

Terrible, terrible adaptation. Bloody battle scenes insterspersed with a weak love story, and none of the depth of the book. Chingachgook's pivotal speech--from which both take their title--didn't even make sense in the movie; who, without reading the book, would know the import of that statement, "I am the last of the Mohicans?" That Chingachgook was releasing Hawkeye from an obligation made more sacred because there was no other to fulfill it?

The characters were tossed into a hat, mixed around, and redistributed; the major themes of the novel were completely lost; and what you ended up with was a whole lotta mass-consumption Hollywood (blood, guts, and sexuality) with a high-sounding title.

While I'm here, I'll weigh in on "boovie." Sorry, Steve...but it's terrible. Sounds like 1950s teentalk, like cows as was mentioned, like something from a cartoon.
"Cinebook" (also mentioned) is better, but still too lingoesque. Do we have to have a cute and self-consciously clever morph-word?

I tend to use "literary films," lit-films, or screen lit to refer to what we are discussing here, which your original blog post suggested wasn't just books made into movies, but GOOD books (literature) made into GOOD movies (big-screen film).

And most of mine have already been mentioned, some both pro and con.

I will add a couple that fit the discussion, and although both are based on good reads, neither could be considered truly literary.

The first is _The Prize Winner of Defiance, Ohio_, a hilarious memoir with hints of darkness made into a heartbreaking and hopeful movie. The second is _Pobby and Dingan,_ an unassuming but intriguing novella made into the powerfully simple movie _Opal Dreams_.

Mary Ruxlow

I listened to and loved the unabridged audio book, "Prince of Tides" during a long commute some years ago. I was so disappointed in the movie I never watched it again, in spite of Nick Nolte's wonderful performance. I've admired the work of Nick Nolte and Barbra Streisand for years, but could not get past Ms Streisand in long fingernails and mini-skirts as a believable therapist.


I am a professor at a local community college, and recently I taught a course, "Writing About Movies." It was a great course, and the students were really "into" it. Some of the films, from books, obviously, were "Midnight Express," Jack Finney's, (the original) "Invasion of the Body Snatchers," "Cool Hand Luke," James Clavell's mini-masterpiece "The Children's Story," and the stylish, but not so true-to-the-story, "Masque of the Red Death." However, my personal favorites would include "The Godfather," "Silence of the Lambs," "Pan's Labyrinth," "Die Hard," "Mercury Rising," based on the book "Simple Simon," "The Wizard of Oz," gotta' throw in "Gone With the Wind," "Frankenstein," "Dracula," (the originals on both of those),
"No Country for Old Men," "Lord of the Rings," (the trilogy), and all the Harry Potter flicks.

The comments to this entry are closed.