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

[selvatica.livejournal.com]

I'm afraid I do disagree with you. I absolutely adore Pride and Prejudice and the BBC adaptation brought the book to life and was extremely true to the book. With this in mind, I was a bit reluctant to go and see the 2005 film with Kiera Knightley. I felt that a 2 hour film could not do the book justice. However, I went. It wasn't the same, by any means, but what stood out for me were the differences which gave the film it's own charm. And, I have it on DVD.
I'm also surprised about your comment about Burtons/Depp's Willy Wonka. At least that version was close to the book, where the previous rubbish is not!
As for Alice in Wonderland, I've never read the book, but the film was absolutely amazing and I'm sure it will stand out on it's own as a brilliant bit of filmmaking :)

[laurainlimbo.livejournal.com]

oh hi - you changed your user name - at first I was like, who is this? but it's you:) what made you decide to change your name?

well I guess I have to sort of clarify what I meant about adaptations. I think they can work if they don't completely stray from the author's intent or style. It's okay to add a few things here or there, if it seems to fit the author's original ideas. It's tricky, to be sure:) I really loved that BBC version of Pride and Prejudice too, and I've liked quite a few Shakespeare movie adaptations too. I didn't see the film version because I don't like Keira Knightley. I know that's shallow but oh well. Adapting a book to the screen is tough, and it's not always a bad thing. it's also a personal taste, too I guess.
and that's what it comes down to for me with Burton's Willy Wonka. I've heard from many people that it's closer to the book than the earlier version with Gene Wilder. But I guess I just personally didn't like what Johnny Depp did with his characterization of Wonka. I love Johnny, quite a bit. But his freakish makeup and silly hair was just over the top for me (and I feel the same about his Mad Hatter in the Alice movie). I grew up watching Gene Wilder's interpretation, and it's just become a part of my childhood. To me, Gene will always be Willy Wonka. And I felt that movie was easier to watch then Burton's frenetic remake. I got tired watching Burton's version.

Perhaps I'm being a bit too hasty in my decision not to see Burton's Alice - but I guess it is just personal preference, again. I didn't realize until someone pointed out to me that it's not really an adaptation, as much as an extension of the book, as it's many years later in time. Creatively, I'm sure it's a great film. and maybe I'll see it someday:)

sorry for the long reply - but thanks! I love these kinds of discussions:)