Movies, it seems, have always drawn from the literary world. I would venture to say that at least half of all movies made are based on some other work. This hasn't ceased up till today when so many movies designed with a female audience in mind have come from best selling novels.
As well, mainstream movies over the last decade have increasingly become more unique. Unique doesn't mean better, but they're just unique. You can't just make a romance comedy or a buddy cop or drama. There must be something totally different added to mix. Yes, this sort of has always been the case in film, producers and studios say they don't want the same old thing, but really they do; they want to stay with what works. So what happens is they take a regular romance comedy and add some extremes. For instance, the locations have to be extreme. It never takes place in Cleveland or Irvine. If they are not set in New York or LA, the setting becomes a giant character that affects the story, plot, side characters, etc. Alabama, Texas, the Bayou, Alaska...
Then of course, the characters can never, ever have a boring job. They run magazines, are investigative journalists, wedding planners, TV show hosts. Everything is bigger and bigger. This has applied to not only the romance comedy, it has applied to all genres. (Giant robots that want to enslave the Earth, a virus that can wipe out THE WHOLE EARTH, trash has engulfed the WHOLE EARTH, etc.) Think of the last buddy cop film...Cop Out. It bombed. (It was supposed to be an homage to the classic, but didn't seem to be funny enough to do that, so it didn't come across as that to audiences.) The last romance comedy...Bounty Hunter. What was unique about it? Nothing. It bombed.
But recently 3 films have bucked that trend, all are "chick flicks" of a different kind. They're based on literary works. They don't have "huge" stakes. One doesn't have a falling-in-love plot. One does partially have that, but its plot is more based on life after falling in love. And the third has such a unique take on falling in love that it's beyond a normal love story. These films show that the film industry has been embarking on telling unique stories that embrace different formats, while still acquiring stories from other mediums.
Julie & Julia - There is no falling in love story here. This film isn't about a do or die situation. In fact, the movie follows two smaller stories; one about Julia Child, the famous cook, and the other about a modern woman trying to find meaning in her boring life by cooking everything in Julia Child's book.
The film is about two women living life in worlds they didn't expect to be in, and rather than sitting back and living in either their husbands world or just a disappointing world, they take the initiative to do something they love. Both start out only to prove something to themselves, but end up affecting others.
Julie's storyline is a little less interesting, but I think that's because the other half of the film is Meryl Streep playing Julia Child! Pretty interesting to watch. But neither story warrants a full film. But yet, both stories were intriguing, enough to care what happened to both. Interesting that they could do that without having to save the Earth, or have a situation where they'll die. This was a film about two average women just trying to fulfill their lives. That speaks to the women of America who live in just that world.
The Time Traveler's Wife - This film didn't do so good last year in theaters, despite being based on a best selling novel. Like I mentioned, this film doesn't fit into the normal format of a chick flick. The story doesn't follow the boy gets girl, then loses girl, then gets girl storyline. Rather, it follows the story of a couple who are deeply in love, but have a huge problem; he time travels. He can't control it, and throughout his life he suddenly leaves his clothes behind and travels to other times and places. Of course, this puts a strain on their marriage.
I found it engulfing. It's like no other love story(I'm no expert, mind you.) that I've ever seen. He travels through his whole lifetime, to when she's a girl, and a teenager; developing a relationship with her far before in his normal life. So it's quite awkward when he meets her for the first time, and she has already had a lifetime with his older self. There are so many great moments, but what stayed with me were the metaphors. The obvious of course being the metaphor from any marriage. Husbands and wives are never naturally on the same page, and often the man is quite distant, either literally or mentally. Often the wife has to keep up the marriage even when the husband is gone.
But then, looking at how they treated each other we can see a better metaphor for how women and men see each other. She had known him since she was a girl, he having traveled back in time to when she was a little girl. Then later in her teenage years, he's still the older him. And when she meets him for the first time in "real time" he's younger than his time traveling self. Women have an ideal man in their minds their whole life. He fits the mold of everything they want and desire. When they actually meet the man they'll marry, he never ever can live up to that ideal. Even when it's the same man. She needs to grow into that ideal herself, along with him. They grow together into it, just like the couple does in the movie. It took quite a bit of time until he reached the point where he was the same age when he visited her as a girl.
This was a far more interesting movie than people probably gave credit for. Betsy was bummed, though, because the movie took out all the sexy bits and was no where near as steamy as the book.
Which leaves us with Twilight, the other best selling novel turned into a movie. Say what you will about this (if you've actually seen it, if not then don't say anything.), this movie is remarkably unique. Again, though, unique doesn't mean good. It just means different. This movie is very different. However, if this movie wasn't based on anything it would be utterly retarded. But with a background of the novel it's based on, this makes for an interesting adaptation. Enough has been said of the metaphors of their relationship, so I won't go into detail there, but merely comment on the script itself.
What movie has a scene in a high school chemistry class with virtually no dialogue? Actually, what movie set in a high school has any scene with barely no dialogue? High school movies have more dialogue than any other genre. Because teenagers are so chatty, they have to tell you everything they think, especially the females. And yes, there are females in the movie that do act like that. But for the two leads to be involved in a scene where they pretty much don't say anything is really different. There are quite a few moments through the film where the characters could speak but don't. And I know this is based on the style of the book where much of what's going on is in their thoughts. You can't translate that into dialogue, unless you want characters thinking out loud. (Like Lois in Superman the Movie when they're flying. "Can you read my mind? Do you know what it is that you do to me? I don't know who you are. Just a friend from another star. Here I am, like a kid out of school. Holding hands with a god. I'm a fool. Will you look at me? Quivering. Like a little girl, shivering. You can see right through me. Can you read my mind? Can you picture the things I'm thinking of? Wondering why you are... all the wonderful things you are. You can fly. You belong in the sky. You and I... could belong to each other. If you need a friend... I'm the one to fly to. If you need to be loved... here I am. Read my mind.")
Exactly. We can't have that the whole movie. So how do you do it? With looks, actions, tone. This was a simple movie, pretty low budget by adaptation standards. They achieved so much, with such a simple amount of dialogue. And it all stems from the source material. Sure, it's cotton candy, but they've been making cotton candy since the dawn of fiction.
The movie took a different approach. They couldn't make a dialogue heavy high school drama. Dialogue would wear it down and drag the audience with it. Maybe that did happen to some. I'm sure a large portion of guys were weary by the end of it, but just imagine if it wasn't cotton candy.
Rachel and I really liked the Julia part of the movie. So much so we bought the book (Mastering the Art of French Cooking not My Life in France). It’s a great book! I thought Julie was just a whiny B. But you are right the Julia part might not make a good movie by itself.
ReplyDeleteI have seen Twilight so I can say its total crap. The Rifftrax version is absolutely hilarious though. New Moon has more plot holes but is a better quality film. I hate the characters so much. They are all selfish and delusional, creepy, whiny, and idiotic. I can’t stand any of them. As a rule they ONLY make bad decisions.
I like Bella and Edward more in the first film, in the second every time Edward shows up or talks it's just annoying.
ReplyDeleteI did like everything else better in the second one, though, for some reason.
Yeah, sexy bits...
ReplyDeleteAlso, I think I'm the only person in America that liked the Julie part more. Maybe it's just because I identify with the "whiny B" thing.