Being an avid movie watcher and getting back into reading again, it seems natural for me to write a blog on film interpretations of certain books.
Now, I do love a good book and I also love a good movie better. However, for me it gets very annoying when you read a fantastic book and it gets ruined when the movie interpretation comes out. I’m not sure about my readers here, but this has happened to me on a number of occasions. Having recently read No Country For Old Men which kind of reignited this annoyance of mine. Even though the film is fantastic and I had watched it before I had even read the book, I loved it. I had wanted to read it since and considering I had to read it for university, it was deemed a good opportunity to do so. After reading the book, I had actually figured that the interpretation of the book by McCarthy is missing a few details. However this is not me complaining about the film and the interpretation by Coen brothers, which are without a doubt becoming my favourite directors. I’m not going to state them because if you enjoyed the film, you should therefore love the book and go and read it.
I also dislike reading a book after I’ve seen the film because it shapes my viewing of characters inside the film interpretation. For example, the character of Anton Chigurh, although portrayed fantastically by Javier Bardem, I couldn’t get the image of Javier Bardem out of my head. Although this is not a bad thing, I prefer to shape my own ideas about these character and how they turn out when watching the film. To sum this up, during the book for No Country For Old Men, no real description is given of Chigurh, so essentially it is left for reader to decide what he looks like. I say this because my expectations of these characters, the setting or the plot in the book, could be reflected differently in the film interpretation thus meaning that it could be my problem when watching a film interpretation.
Carrying on from my point, it happened for me when reading Angels and Demons by Dan Brown, probably one of my favourite books, with it’s descriptive qualities and having that ‘can’t put it down’ effect on me. I watched the film and I was left sorely disappointed, but again I can only assume it’s down to my expectations.
Now, I assure you, i’m not disappointed in the fact that there are film interpretations because I love films and what could be better than for me to see one of my favourite books on the big screen. It goes without saying that there are better interpretations compared to others, for example, the No Country For Old Men interpretation is a lot better compared to the blockbuster hits Harry Potter. That is my own opinion though. For some reason I am not phased by the Harry Potter series of films compared to others. It might be down to the fact that I, like many others, grew up reading the books, but when watching the films something was missing for me. The cast cannot be faulted, neither can the production value of the Harry Potter, but I was not aesthetically pleased by the films unlike No Country For Old Men.
My earlier comment about the annoyance is true, but it’s a half-hearted annoyance. Again, with a mixture of my expectations of this would create this half-hearted annoyance. To make a light example of this, it would be like your friends making a massive deal out of a new band and you listen to them and dislike them. It’s a bit like that. Seeing a trailer or hearing new about it would get me pumped for this but then an annoyance comes over me when I watch this film.
Thank you for reading, any comments and notes are appreciated highly.