laurainlimbo (
laurainlimbo) wrote2010-03-11 03:53 pm
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Entry tags:
Johnny Depp the Gender Bender?
in my effort to avoid all of the important things in life (exercise, studying, writing), I've been reading too much stuff on the internet. for all you Johnny Depp fans out there, I found this video slideshow of his adventures in gender-bending through the years. I've always loved him, and seeing all these clips makes me realize what a talented actor he really is. I haven't seen the movie Before Night Falls (though it was on my Netflix queue for about a year before I left the country). The only one of these I didn't like was Willy Wonka - Johnny went way over the top on that one, and his performance gave me nightmares! and of course on this slideshow they didn't include some of my favorite of his performances, like Donnie Brasco, Dead Man, Gilbert Grape, and Benny and Joon... (but I guess those were not considered "gender-bending"?)
I've decided that I don't want to see the new Alice movie. I'm sure that the whole cast is good in it, and I'm sure that visually it's very stunning... but I read this review on Slate's website, and it sounds like Tim Burton is taking WAYYY too many liberties with the story. I'm a purist - I can't see why people can't make movie adaptations that even slightly resemble the story, especially when you're dealing with something as classic as Lewis Carroll! And why make the Mad Hatter a love interest for Alice? there wasn't the slightest hint of that in the book.
I'm not trying to sound like a snob, but I wrote a paper on Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass in college. I really loved everything about those stories! It's like seeing the Leonardo DiCaprio version of Romeo and Juliet - or any of these modern adaptations of Shakespeare. they don't work for me.
I know many people will disagree with me about this, but film adaptations work only when they stay true to the original author's vision. Why else do we want to see the film except to see a broader view of what we've read and loved?
anyway, that's enough of my soapbox. I'm back to staring at katakana and kanji and wondering if I'll ever learn Japanese well enough...
I've decided that I don't want to see the new Alice movie. I'm sure that the whole cast is good in it, and I'm sure that visually it's very stunning... but I read this review on Slate's website, and it sounds like Tim Burton is taking WAYYY too many liberties with the story. I'm a purist - I can't see why people can't make movie adaptations that even slightly resemble the story, especially when you're dealing with something as classic as Lewis Carroll! And why make the Mad Hatter a love interest for Alice? there wasn't the slightest hint of that in the book.
I'm not trying to sound like a snob, but I wrote a paper on Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass in college. I really loved everything about those stories! It's like seeing the Leonardo DiCaprio version of Romeo and Juliet - or any of these modern adaptations of Shakespeare. they don't work for me.
I know many people will disagree with me about this, but film adaptations work only when they stay true to the original author's vision. Why else do we want to see the film except to see a broader view of what we've read and loved?
anyway, that's enough of my soapbox. I'm back to staring at katakana and kanji and wondering if I'll ever learn Japanese well enough...
no subject
I couldn't watch Before Night Falls, I think I ended up skipping through it to find Johnny's scenes, the rest of it didn't interest me at all.
As for film adaptations of books (or Shakespeare), I'm afraid I have to disagree with you on that. Purism is commendable but artistic vision does not need to be restricted by source material, especially when the source has been adapted many times.
Off the top of my head, there is one film (Manhunter) I didn't like because it managed to throw out the best material of a book I'd enjoyed (and the title so I can forgive it somewhat and pretend it's not a Hannibal Lecter film) but I've come to realise that film is an entirely different artistic medium to books so there have to be differences.
In Charlie and the Chocolate factory Johnny's actual performance may not be exactly like the Wonka of the book, but the film itself is a far truer adaptation than the Gene Wilder version (which, incidentally, Roald Dahl himself hated and they rewrote his screenplay, although they left him with a writing credit), though that is not the main reason I prefer the newer adaptation.
I was probably just the right age when Baz Luhman's Romeo + Juliet came out and I really enjoyed it (and I agree with
But anyway, I've just come back from seeing Alice in Wonderland and I thoroughly enjoyed it, I can't disagree more with that review you've linked to (apart from the dig at 3D) Empire's is far more even handed here.
The only reason anyone could possibly think that the Mad Hatter is Alice's love interest is because all the people from her real life are represented by characters in Wonderland and the Mad Hatter appears to be the man everyone wants her to marry and I suppose he also represents her father (he definitely has multiple personalities) so it's more of a paternal love than a romantic one.
Well, this has turned into a long comment! I'm not sure if I've managed to properly explain my thoughts, I know my feelings but can't always express them coherently!
Good luck with your Japanese lessons! *hug*
no subject
I have heard people say that Burton's version of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was truer to the book, but I grew up with Gene Wilder as Willy Wonka, so I just couldn't enjoy Johnny's freaky adaptation of the character. it comes down to personal taste, I guess.
and while I'm all for artistic vision in adapting a book, I just hate to think that younger generations may not know how wonderful the original books were if they only see this Burton version of Alice. That's what another friend said here too. I hope they'll be intrigued enough by it to read the books and see what they're missing:) Shakespeare too!
thanks for the long comment- I replied with the same - LOL! it's fun to see different viewpoints:)
no subject
no subject
and this is why I'm making myself responsible for buying classic books for my niece and nephew, in case my sister doesn't:) I'll read with them when I visit!