And I am happy to say, we all liked the movie a lot (and some of us, like me, didn't care that much for the book). The parts it gets rid of (a lot of the Arizona experience with his dad and his girlfriend and the childhood adventures Theodore has with new friend Boris) are only skimmed over, but that was okay with me (it lasted maybe 300 pages in the middle of the book and they were a tough read). There were some characters missing (which makes sense, since the book is very lengthy) and his relationship with Kit is cut short and just shows a few major scenes between the two. Because the book is so long, we lose sight of the painting and forget about it at times and for long passages in the book --- but in the movie, we tend not to --- and he keeps moving it to various places that he goes to (Like Arizona, and working with Hoby at the woodworking shop, etc.) And there's a nice summary on what that painting meant to him. One more comment --- this film's cinematography is divine (Roger Deakins -- one of the best in the business) and the bombin in the museum that starts it all off is effective because the audience sees bits and pieces of it through out the whole film, which builds to a climax, when we see all the pieces put together. I recommend this, whether you read the book or not because it is an intriguing story, more concise here in the film than the book. Here are some links to check out if you are interested inn movie vs. book --- but only AFTER you have seen the film!
link to article on movie “Goldfinch” and its adaptation —
Here is an article on the differences between movie and book:
One more:
THE GOLDFINCH 2 hours and 29 minutes R 2019 4 stars out of 5
No comments:
Post a Comment