A Film A Day: Based on a Book

2020 Blind Spot Series: The Notebook (2004)

Despite my not being into romantic films, I considered it a lack of mine to have not seen the one film many believe to be the greatest romance ever, Nick Cavassetes's The Notebook. Unlike my previous Blind Spot picks though, I did know a little going in because, when the idea of becoming a film blogger wasn't even at the back of my mind, I gave the film a chance only to quit after 10 minutes. It didn't go much better this time around as, while I managed to finish it, I found The Notebook to be just an overrated romantic flick.

It's been two years since I read Ruta Sepetys's novel Between Shades of Gray, one of the most emotional as well as difficult to read books I've read. So when I heard it had been adapted into a movie, I was pretty excited to see it. Unfortunately, Ashes in the Snow —they changed the title to avoid confusion with the Fifty Shades series— is a disappointment.

Set in the 1940s, the story follows Lina (Bel Powley), a sixteen-year-old Lithuanian girl who is preparing for art school, first dates and all that summer has to offer. But one night, the Soviet secret police force into her house, and her mother, Elena (Lisa Loven Kongsli), her little brother, Jonas (Tom Sweet), and she are deported to a Soviet labour camp.

Something I've come across often when reading about Michael Noer's Papillon is that it is a bad remake of the 1973 film of the same name. Having read the book upon which both are based, I refuse to call this a remake. Instead, I consider it to be a different approach to the material whose outcome is barely decent, but still a notch above the "original".

The film follows Henri Charrière (Charlie Hunnam), nicknamed Papillon because of the butterfly tattoo he had on his chest, a French safecracker who is convicted of murder and is sentenced to life in the notorious penal colony in French Guyana. On his way there, he meets Louis Dega (Rami Malek), a rich, convicted forger who asks Papillon for protection. In exchange, he will finance Papillon's escape attempts.

Last December I finally bought and read Henri Charrière's autobiography Papillon. I wasn't crazy about it at first and I only kept reading because it was damn expensive and I didn't want to waste money like that. Eventually, it grew on me and I ended up loving it. So when I learnt there was a movie based on it, starring no less than Steve McQueen and Dustin Hoffman, I knew I had to watch it. I've been putting it off ever since because of its length. I wouldn't have missed much if I kept putting it off as Franklin J. Schaffner's Papillon isn't that memorable.

The film follows Henri Charrière (Steve McQueen), also known as Papillon, who, wrongly convicted of murdering a pimp, is sentenced to life and imprisoned in the penal colony in French Guyana. On his voyage there, he meets Louis Dega (Dustin Hoffman), a forger who sold fake government bonds. Degas has enemies, Papillon vows to protect him and, over the years, with Degas's help, he attempts to escape many times, despite solitary confinement being the punishment.

I love a good mystery novel/film and over the past year, I read a lot of Agatha Christie's novels. Murder on the Orient Express, with its mindblowing ending, was one of my favourites which is why I was very excited about Kenneth Branagh's Murder on the Orient Express mainly because of its stellar cast. I eventually skipped it because of the not-so-pleasing reviews. I finally decided to give it a chance and it isn't that bad. It isn't that good either though.

The storyline, everybody knows it. The famous detective Hercules Poirot (Kenneth Branagh) is vacationing in Istanbul and soon finds himself on the Orient Express on a trip to Calais, sharing the train with an eclectic assortment of travellers. Of course, a murder is committed and, as the train gets stopped by an avalanche and the passengers find themselves trapped in the train, Poirot must solve the crime before the train starts working again.

I read Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 last year and to say that I loved it is a little reductive. I'm not the only one who feels that way about Bradbury's novel and therefore turning it into a good movie was not easy. That said, I had high expectations for HBO's Fahrenheit 451 because of the network's resources and the cast, especially the cast. Unfortunately, it's a misfire.

Set in a distant future, when books are banned and firefighters, in order to destroy them, start fires instead of putting them out, the film follows Guy Montag (Michael B. Jordan), a young fireman who does his job without questioning believing that's the right thing to do. One day, while on his job, Guy witnesses something terrible and begins to question his task.

Genre

Adventure | Drama | Thriller

Director

Peter Brook

Country

Cast

James Aubrey, Tom Chapin, Hugh Edwards, Roger Elwin, Tom Gaman, David Surtees, Nicholas Hammond, Roger Allan

Storyline

Survivors of a plane crash, a group of British young boys are marooned on an island. Left to fend for themselves, they must take on the responsibilities of adults, even if they are not ready to do so.

Opinion

Having read the Classic novel by William Golding, I couldn't help but be disappointed by the film that many people have flattered.

Dull in some parts, Lord of the Flies follows the book pretty well but lacks enthusiasm, and a deep psychological study.

With adaptations of novels often happens that some of detail from the story are removed in the film. This is no exception, and if you're read the book, you may be disappointing to see that some of the parts you found interesting are not included. However, this is not the film's problem. In fact, the film tells the original story in a pretty good way, but the problem is that it simply tells the story.

Director Peter Brook did not manage to convey that sense of restlessness that accompanies the reader through the novel. The terrible, disturbing presence of the Lord of the Flies, reincarnation of evil and death, is practically absent. There is no presence of that imaginary yet very real monster that creeps in the minds of the hunters, symbolized by the rotting pig's head.

Among the parts left out in the adaptation there is one that should have been in the film: the conch shell smashed into a million pieces when Piggy was killed. This is one of the most important parts of the story, as it symbolizes the ending of civilization. But apparently it was not that important to the screenwriter.

The cinematography isn't great, the acting is mediocre and the casting is mostly wrong.