Patrick Anderson reviews Vera Caspary's Laura in today's
Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/23/AR2006072300646.html
He starts off by saying what a big fan he is of the movie,
but he had never previously read the book upon which it was
based. A recent rewatching of the movie finally led me to
pick up the novel, which had been sitting on my shelves for
years, too. During this most recent viewing, I was pretty
aware of the seams between the acts, so I wanted to see how
the book handled it.
Indeed, the book is most interesting for its early use of
shifting first person sections. And it was an enjoyable
enough read, even knowing the McGuffin. However, I am in
total agreement with Anderson that the movie greatly improved
upon the novel.
I do not agree with this more global statement of his:
"It's easy to see how Preminger was attracted to the novel's
strengths, confident that he could fix its weaknesses. Many
of the best-known noir novels have become better movies: John
Huston greatly improved Dashiell Hammett's 'The Maltese
Falcon,' and Billy Wilder and Raymond Chandler worked wonders
on James M. Cain's 'Double Indemnity.'"
The Maltese Falcon is a better movie than novel? I don't
think so. As much as I love that movie, it doesn't come close
to Hammett's book. In fact, I'd say it's a pretty rare
occurrence when a film betters the book upon which it is
based. Sure, I can think of a few examples (Six becoming
Three Days of the Condor comes to mind), but they are the
exceptions.
Mark
RARA-AVIS home page: http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rara-avis-l/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:
rara-avis-l-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 24 Jul 2006 EDT