Johnny Depp the Gender Bender?

[laurainlimbo]

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...

Comments

[laurainlimbo.livejournal.com]

I know lots of people disagree with me on the Shakespeare adaptations, and I have liked several film versions of his works, including Zefferelli's Romeo and Juliet which came out the year I was born, and which was the one I watched in high school (yes, I'm that old - LOL!) I guess I was going through a phase at time, and couldn't see the creative aspects of Baz Luhrman's Romeo and Juliet when it came out. There was another Shakespeare adaptation that I tried watching, Hamlet with Ethan Hawke (2000) - it was set in modern-day New York City, and I couldn't watch more than 10 minutes. it just felt weird. I loved Mel Gibson's Hamlet though! Like I said, I guess I'm just a purist at heart:)

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:)

[wolfpurplemoon]

I would also hope that any film adaptation would make children curious to read the original book, unless it's Twilight of course! :D

[laurainlimbo.livejournal.com]

sadly they probably prefer reading Twilight!

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!