Well, we watched the Road last night. I had read the book as mentioned earlier and I have to say the book was very intense and frightening to me. I did not have the same feeling during the movie. There were good scenes and the backgrounds were good. But I didn't like the overly sentimental music during the tender scenes. In the book I was scared the entire time they spent in the "stocked cellar or bomb shelter". It was a godsend but also a trap if caught there. The boy's apparent non fear of the horror around them, such as sadistic rapists, murderers, and cannibals, make me a little angry. I know we should look for goodness in the world but hey, consider the circumstances!!!
I understood the boy wanting to give food away but his complete disregard to be quiet when hiding from the "bad" guys drove me crazy. He and his dad argued so loudly while hidden upstairs while the cannibalistic family was in the house with them seemed very unrealistic. Also in the book it emphasized the hunger and the thinness of the two travelers. They didn't appear that skinny to me in the movie. I know you can't starve a child for the movie but they could have made their faces more gaunt like. Also the ending of the movie varied from the book. When the father dies in the movie, they are not aware of the "family" nearby. In the book the father and son meet the "family" before the father dies. Thus, in the book the father dies knowing his son will be watched over, as much as humanly possible, by the new "family." In the movie I had to ask myself, would I leave my young, obviously yet unprepared son to live by himself in this horrible new world of starvation, loneliness, terror and possibly terrible torture and death to wander down the road alone? Or would I take him with me, being death of course? We all know through history parents or parent has killed a child or children rather than leave them alone and defenseless in the face of impending doom. We all hope we would never have to make this terrible decision but when this has happened, we have not completely condemned the parent. I guess each situation requires its own decision. In some cases such as the Japanese mothers who threw their babies over the cliffs and then jumped after them to save their children and themselves from the horror of being captured and tortured by American troops (what they had been told by their superiors), the mothers who did not kill themselves and their children made the right decision. But we all know there have been cases when the survivors and their children suffered horrible tribulations and death. So, as I said, a tough tough decision we all never want to make.
Also during the movie my husband kept saying, why are they going down the road? Where are they going? Good question, where were they going? And why? Did they think there was a better place somewhere down the road? Had they heard something in the past to suggest a better place somewhere? I knew they were going south in the hopes of warmer temperatures but there was no mention of a better place somewhere. Also what was the uplifting of the earth when all the big trees where falling all around them? For a wild minute I thought shades of the latest War of the Worlds when the underground machines appeared from the earth. I assumed it was just the big trees falling over and their roots upturning the earth but it didn't appear that way. Not sure of that scene.
SHIRL'
I understood the boy wanting to give food away but his complete disregard to be quiet when hiding from the "bad" guys drove me crazy. He and his dad argued so loudly while hidden upstairs while the cannibalistic family was in the house with them seemed very unrealistic. Also in the book it emphasized the hunger and the thinness of the two travelers. They didn't appear that skinny to me in the movie. I know you can't starve a child for the movie but they could have made their faces more gaunt like. Also the ending of the movie varied from the book. When the father dies in the movie, they are not aware of the "family" nearby. In the book the father and son meet the "family" before the father dies. Thus, in the book the father dies knowing his son will be watched over, as much as humanly possible, by the new "family." In the movie I had to ask myself, would I leave my young, obviously yet unprepared son to live by himself in this horrible new world of starvation, loneliness, terror and possibly terrible torture and death to wander down the road alone? Or would I take him with me, being death of course? We all know through history parents or parent has killed a child or children rather than leave them alone and defenseless in the face of impending doom. We all hope we would never have to make this terrible decision but when this has happened, we have not completely condemned the parent. I guess each situation requires its own decision. In some cases such as the Japanese mothers who threw their babies over the cliffs and then jumped after them to save their children and themselves from the horror of being captured and tortured by American troops (what they had been told by their superiors), the mothers who did not kill themselves and their children made the right decision. But we all know there have been cases when the survivors and their children suffered horrible tribulations and death. So, as I said, a tough tough decision we all never want to make.
Also during the movie my husband kept saying, why are they going down the road? Where are they going? Good question, where were they going? And why? Did they think there was a better place somewhere down the road? Had they heard something in the past to suggest a better place somewhere? I knew they were going south in the hopes of warmer temperatures but there was no mention of a better place somewhere. Also what was the uplifting of the earth when all the big trees where falling all around them? For a wild minute I thought shades of the latest War of the Worlds when the underground machines appeared from the earth. I assumed it was just the big trees falling over and their roots upturning the earth but it didn't appear that way. Not sure of that scene.
SHIRL'
Posts
Very good points - but lets face it - on the whole - if one reads the book - then sees the movie - rarely if ever does the movie come close - and this movie is by far one of the very best examples of this ever - man that movie caught nothing of the movie. Nothing - and I love watching Viggo act - that man tears up a screen like few actors can - but the direction - the look - the pacing - the music - the score - all of it - simply missed the feel of the book by a long shot. It's just grand reading and keeping track how well movie fans are versed in movies and why they work and don't - grand words Shirl' look forward to your posts much!
ReplyDelete