Re: RARA-AVIS: Re:The Long Goodbye

From: Patrick King (
Date: 17 Feb 2007

Polanski was true to the era he was working in and he made a great movie, not a medocre re-hash. I was unaware of the changes in the script. I think it's a different thing when you buy a writer's script and make changes that will direct on film more effectively, than when you buy the rights to a popular story already on the public radar and change it around to suit whatever you're trying to say. These are two different types of creative license. One can get away with the former more easily than the latter.

Patrick King
--- wrote:

> Patrick wrote:
> "Take a look at Polanski's much more successful
> Chinatown. Polanski
> openly stated he was trying for the Chandler
> mystique."
> A sleazy PI who specializes in divorce cases is
> hardly Chandler's noble
> knight.
> "Unlike Altman, though, Polanski didn't have to pay
> for the rights!"
> I'm sure Robert Towne didn't come cheap.
> However, it's interesting that you'd raise Chinatown
> to counter a movie
> that is notorious for changing the ending of its
> source material. To
> Towne's great dismay (although it didn't stop him
> from accepting an
> Oscar for the original screenplay), Polanski
> radically changed the
> ending of Chinatown, and producer OB Evans backed
> him. He also rewrote
> several other key scenes. Now because this was
> based on an (at that
> time) unpublished screenplay, few had read the
> source material,
> sidestepping readers' expectation of faithulness,
> but Polanski did
> exactly the same thing to Chiatown that Brackett did
> to Long Goodbye.
> Mark

____________________________________________________________________________________ It's here! Your new message! Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 17 Feb 2007 EST