Comments on: Book versus film, part 2

By: paulmartin

paulmartin — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 04:35:49 +0000

Thanks for the link, James. FWIW, the more I think about the film, the more dissatisfied I feel with it. Ultimately I found it a frustrating experience because I couldn’t emotionally connect with any of the characters. Each of them was potentially interesting but so much was withheld.

By: James Farrell

James Farrell — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 01:08:11 +0000

I’m sure you’re right, THR. But I’m more familiar with the Da Ponte version of the Don, which is what came to mind when Lurie defied the ethics tribunal.

By: THR

THR — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 13:27:03 +0000

He is essentially Don Juan: you might not like his convictions, but you admire his courage in them.

Surely Lurie, in both book and film, is a heavily ironised Byronic hero. The tension of the book derives in part precisely because Lurie is not Don Juan, his petty scandal at the start notwithstanding. Can anybody seriously imagine a Byronic hero (who conveniently tend not to have daughters) standing idly by when his daughter’s rapists are staying across the road?

By: Francis Xavier Holden

Francis Xavier Holden — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:45:19 +0000

Why?

I enjoyed the book – in two minds about going to the film – On the other hand .. small two minds joke.

One can waste 2 – 4 hours and $30 going to see a film – more if you count getting clean, eating, dresing, driving, parking, deciding what night etc

With a book there’s no pain – if it’s bad, I stop reading, I can give a book away so its never wasted money, no need for a shower or to get dressed, I can pace it over a week or sit up all night if I want to, I can read at breakfast, in front of TV or in bed or on the dunny.

By: James Farrell

James Farrell — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:32:12 +0000

Thanks for the correction, FX. I’m flattered that someone would read the post so attentively!

By: Francis Xavier Holden

Francis Xavier Holden — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:28:08 +0000

I did think that the book made Lurie, perhaps not all that likable, and certainly self centered, but, believeable and not all particulary sleazey, in the opening university context.

By: Francis Xavier Holden

Francis Xavier Holden — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:21:57 +0000

In the film when he suggests that there may have been a grain of legitimacy in their relationship, this looks like complete self delusion; in the film it doesnt entirely.

I think you mean “in the BOOK it doesn’t entirely”

By: James Farrell

James Farrell — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 09:44:34 +0000

Surry bloody Hills — that’d be right.

By: Geoff Honnor

Geoff Honnor — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 07:02:31 +0000

Here you are James. Courtesy of the interwebs. The answer to your question:

http://sydneynearlydailyphot.blogspot.com/2007_06_01_archive.html