5 ms·
Any movie (or generally any artistic creation) can change the audience. But Snakes on a Plane might not hit the same as say The Wages of Fear. Wikis for those
by Meerax 3y ago
Any movie (or generally any artistic creation) can change the audience. But Snakes on a Plane might not hit the same as say The Wages of Fear.
Wikis for those not familiar
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wages_of_Fear https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wages_of_Fear
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snakes_on_a_Plane https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snakes_on_a_Plane
- pstuart 3y agoWages of Fear now added to my "one of these days" list. Thank you!
- wfleming 3y agoSorcerer (1977) directed by William Friedkin (known for The Exorcist and The French Connection) is adapted from the same novel and is also great.
- genghisjahn 3y agoI saw Sorcerer on the big screen a month ago in Philly. Amazing. Made me wonder what I’ve been watching for the last 20 years.
- engineer_22 3y agoThe Exorcist is the worst film I have ever seen, bar none. I was not surprised to find out it was hopelessly behind schedule and over budget. I was surprised to learn it was (still is) incredibly popular.
- gumby 3y agoIn general you're better off reading the book when the film is just an adaptation, as the book can give more context, inner dialogue etc than a film can, simply due to the medium. There are of course exceptions. Famously, Palahniuk has said the Fight Club film captured his intent better than his novel did. I also think film of The English Patient, which covers only a tiny section of what I consider a forgettable novel, is quite good, but even if you disagree I think almost anyone would say the film is better. And of course plenty of films aren't novel adaptations. Regardless, if you're looking for a "story that could change my life" you're likely to get much more from the text than the adaptation. The strengths and weaknesses of the two media are just too different.
- pstuart 3y agoMy limited understanding is that Palahniuk's book was a kind of fuck you to the publishing establishment (and in that vein, I highly recommend American Fiction). Fight Club is one of my favorite movies of all time (although I could do with less onscreen fighting). It was (to me) part of a cosmic trilogy of movies ending the millennium: * Fight Club * American Beauty * The Matrix All three dealt with the concept of sleepwalking through life and the shock of waking up from it.
- jncfhnb 3y agoThese two films are completely dissimilar in their ambitions and the distinction between them has nothing to do with the merits of “a classic”
- late2part 3y agoLook at Mr. Movie Critic here - next you'll tell me there's no moral lesson in Pulp Fiction?
- WesolyKubeczek 3y agoIt’s but a great first aid tutorial!
- wincy 3y agoHah, true story, I had a college history professor who went on a screed about Pulp Fiction and how it was nihilistic and obscene and that Tarantino would make the world a better place by just offing himself. He said he believed the film and other films in a similar vein made the world a worse place and had literally negative value as a literary work. It was a wild semester.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- lupire 3y agoIt's funny until you remember that the class cost $2,000
- watwut 3y agoPulp Fiction is nihilistic tho. I like that, nihilism can be fun to watch. But nihilistic it is.
- dkga 3y agoI can’t see nihilism and a Hollywood movie in the same sentence without thinking of the Big Lebowski. Those German guys were the real nihilists! :)
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Waterluvian 3y agoSnakes on a Plane is, allegorically, a retelling of The Odyssey. (Drugs recommended)
- newaccount7g 3y agoSnakes on Plane genuinely changed people’s lives more than Wages of Fear because it showed people the potential of making dumb jokes big. Wages of Fear was basically the same moralizing people get every day. Movies have a self referential quality that makes them more intellectually engaging than mere novels.
- Ludleth19 3y ago>Movies have a self referential quality that makes them more intellectually engaging than mere novels. This was written by someone who hasn't seriously engaged in reading novels lol Novels have been doing this sort of thing on a pretty deep level since basically their inception, and in more modern contexts no movie could replicate something like Pale Fire or Gravity's Rainbow for example. Self-referentiality is also a pretty boring trick after awhile, self-awareness and referentiality are very juvenile creative traits that often (not always) are seeking some sort of pat on the back for the mere act of referentiality itself. These things should be starting points, not the focus of an entire work unless there's a broader point to be made. Fredric Jameson has written a great deal about this sort of thing, it's basically the default position of culture in a lot of ways now, there's nothing inherently exciting about it. This isn't to say one medium is superior to the other or anything, I just find it to be a very weird critique of "mere" novels when self-referentiality goes way deeper there, the only things I can really think of that come close are 8 1/2 or maybe some of Charlie Kaufman's work like Adaptation.
- phist_mcgee 3y agoTangentially, this is where the works of Dan Harmon (Community, Rick and Morty) fall down; his shows slide into self-referential, in-group pleasing messes.
- Ludleth19 3y agoHard agree. I think this also simultaneously highlights the genius of someone like Felini with 8 1/2, referentiality done right to actually get at deeper themes/characterization, not just for the sake of referentiality itself.