Dear Patrick,
I think you take my comment much too seriously and I thought
that my
Œscotch¹ asides were jazzing up the atmosphere...but your
e-mail follows two or three others along the same avenues...
Fundamentally any adaptation of any book into film has to be
looked at as a film and not against some kind of meter on how
much it is ³faithfull to the book...to the character...to the
plot...to the genre...whatever...²...Does it work as a film
is the fundamental question and in the case of The Long
Goodbye, as a film, and also as a Bob Altman film (sub
category here), it works very well for some people...like
myself or Etienne B. as he just mentioned in a recent e-mail
to us all. I of course concede that it may not ³really
captures the essense of Chandler's LA² but is that the
question?...and who owns finally ³the essence of Chandler¹s
LA²....who owns the SF of Hammett...in my book the ŒHammett¹
of Wim Wenders...who owns the Œessence of London²: the
wrestling gym of Night and the City or the West India docks
of The Long Good Friday of John McKenzie...???... In the same
vein, is Bogart more ŒHammettian¹ than Frederic Forrest...my
vote goes for Forrest...and that¹s purely because he sticks
closer in my mind to the image I have of the writer of Red
Harvest, since that novel is my benchmark on the
character...and the writer... Gould is very much Œaway¹ from
the accepted perception, granted...but it captivates you and
you want to see it several times to get more every
time...
...at least I do...
...sorry I don¹t do popcorn...just single malt...or Cahors,
Madiran or Iroul駵y...or the occasional gimlet...
Sylvestre (Steve) Novak
Cinefrog@comcast.net
On 1/26/07 4:50 PM, "Patrick King" <
abrasax93@yahoo.com> wrote: Stve Novak wrote:
> "I¹d be less gentle than Jim B...Jim D. you need
to
> watch it, and watch it
> again, and again...and maybe in between
repeated
> viewings you need some
> Glenfiddish or Lagavulin... or somethin¹...because
the
> film is excellent!"
>
> Frankly, Steve, if one has to watch it over and
over
> and alter one's consciousness too, in order
to
> appreciate it, how good can it be? I find Altman's
The
> Long Goodbye a dull, half hearted attempt
made
> primarily to help Elliott Gould change his image.
Even
> in this, the film is a failure. The only film
that
> really captures the essense of Chandler's LA
is
> Bogart's The Big Sleep, and even this was ruined
by
> the Hayze Office and their censorship policies.
These
> stories can all be remade with fidelity to the
plot
> and the era to great advantage. Anything less will
be
> the usual Hollywood 'rush with the flush,' and
others
> will be having this same discussion 20 years from
now
> about how good the originals are and how
stupid
> producers are to screw with their basic
elements.
>
> Patrick King
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 04 Feb 2007 EST