2

[Edited on November 26, 2008 at 11:47 PM. Reason : s]

11/26/2008 11:46:03 PM

Quote :

"aw hell, Stephen King and Tom Clancy no wonder you weren't that impressed. carry on. "

sarcasm yo

11/26/2008 11:46:56 PM

You know why you feel tag-teamed, joe_schmoe? Because you're claiming that a two year-old book that you picked up in the fucking supermarket is the greatest piece of literature the world has ever seen, and there are a number of people who are well-versed in the subject who know that said claim is, at very least, highly debatable. If you want to argue about it, please do...that's what we do over here in everything-is-subjective land.

The Road is great. It's not in my top 25 books. If you love it, that's wonderful. More people should love books, be it individual books or reading as a whole. With that said, I love lots of shit that other people think is mediocre, and that's okay, too. I am of the unwavering belief that the two best lines in English literature are "All right, then, I'll go to hell," and "My mother is a fish." Most people disagree, but I don't go hunting for critics who back up my theory. This isn't TSB; everyone is right and everyone is wrong.

Unfortunately for excellent writers like McCarthy, literature can have little to no effect on the film it inspires; the best example I can think of right now is Naked Lunch, a book that should never have been made into a movie, and a movie that hardly resembles its source material. I point this out merely because a great book does not make a great movie by default. It requires thousands of steady, focused hands.

I respect the fact that you feel strongly enough about The Road to argue its merits incessantly, but here's the thing: you're out of your element, Donnie.

This message brought to you by the Pabst Brewing Company of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and the general consensus that I'm kind of a dick.

11/27/2008 3:49:35 AM

touche

11/27/2008 12:25:56 PM

^^ oh snap

11/27/2008 1:24:33 PM

This. Book. Sucked.

And yes, I've read it. Twice actually, the second time to make sure that I wasnt completely off the wall with my opinion.

11/27/2008 2:40:41 PM

joe_schmoe got burned. I wonder what he'll have to say. I can't wait.

11/27/2008 3:59:44 PM

what i'ma say? oh, not much.

just that -- after more careful consideration -- I'm gonna back off on the comparison to Faulkner. maybe McCarthy's writing style is reminiscent of Faulkner and he shared Faulkner's editor, and all... but he's nowhere near as prolific as Faulkner was. Yeah, McCarthy wrote a few really good books. Faulkner wrote a shit ton of really good books.

so, you can make a comparison (and some reviewers do), but any comparison is basically superficial.

11/27/2008 10:59:29 PM

ttt

5/15/2009 11:56:06 AM

http://twitchfilm.net/site/view/trailer-for-the-road/

trailer looks terrible

5/15/2009 12:07:23 PM

Yeah, I'm pretty worried that they've just turned it into an action flick. I'm still hoping for the best, though, and I still think John Hillcoat has the most potential of anybody to do the book justice.

5/15/2009 12:15:13 PM

it seems like the trailer might just be playing up the actiony aspects of the film. i'm hoping it doesn't mean that (for instance) the mom/wife will play much of a role.

5/15/2009 1:04:54 PM

seems like the movie may enertaining due to the shots of the countryside and cities etc. I love movies where the characters are in abandoned desolate places (ie. I am legend, 28 days later)


Im wondering if in the movie they will actually come up with more of a story line for the mom and for how "the world" ended. While reading the book I remember that always being on my mind, wtf happened? I think this is easier to get away with in literature than in movies. I can just imagine everyone complaining that not enough of the story was told.

[Edited on May 15, 2009 at 1:56 PM. Reason : *]

5/15/2009 1:54:21 PM

Quote :

"Im wondering if in the movie they will actually come up with more of a story line for the mom and for how "the world" ended. While reading the book I remember that always being on my mind, wtf happened?"

that mystery was a big part of what made the book good and falling into the trap of revealing what the worldwide calamity was will likely be what makes this movie mediocre. i hold out hope though.

5/15/2009 1:57:07 PM

I, for one, can't wait for Jeff Goldblum to pop out of an abandoned convenience store or something and explain how it all went down.

5/15/2009 3:18:13 PM

Esquire called it the most important film of the year.....................................


i wonder if it gets all hardcore political or something

[Edited on May 15, 2009 at 4:28 PM. Reason : .]

5/15/2009 4:27:17 PM

Quote :

"I did read this year's Pulitzer winner (The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao) the way through though. It was very easy to get into and the best book I've read all year."

I'm reading this now.

It sorta makes reading the Road painful, I'm almost done with the Road.

5/15/2009 10:43:24 PM

I read this book last year, and was captivated throughout the entire novel. I felt bummed after the ending though.

I would watch the movie, but would expect it not to live up to the book, as per usual.

5/16/2009 11:02:54 AM

i like how the cover even compares McCarthy to Faulkner

5/23/2009 1:44:52 PM

Blood Meridian is much more Faulkner-esque than The Road

but the previous argument still stands

5/23/2009 1:52:39 PM

the road is a really good book

5/24/2009 4:41:40 AM

^ top notch review.

5/24/2009 12:10:16 PM

would you folks recommend "Blood Meridian?"

5/26/2009 11:55:07 PM

^Nope...at least not right now. Read about half the book and put it down and have read two books since then. Going to finish one last book and then try and go back to it. Gonna finish it before I give a final judgment...but so far it pretty much sucks.

5/27/2009 2:59:32 AM

^^ it's better than The Road in my opinion. But only if you like Westerns and really awesome endings.

5/30/2009 1:00:37 PM

well shit, I HATE REALLY AWESOME ENDINGS

5/30/2009 5:04:59 PM

Awesome endings are fucking GAY.

5/30/2009 5:42:54 PM

OK, I read an article about a day before the trailer came out. I'm really kicking myself now, because it came from a reputable source, but I can't remember which one. Anyway, the guy had seen the movie and was in on the meeting to pick the trailer, and he and several other people in the room thought that the trailer that was chosen was shitty because it had an action-movie vibe to it. That opinion, and the rest of the review, lead me to believe that the film itself is not too action-oriented.

Have hope, people.

5/31/2009 10:09:36 PM

It should be coming to the triangle area on December 18th. The distributor keeps pushing it back, though--remember, we're talking about a film originally scheduled for a release of November 2008--so that might change between now and then. I know Galaxy is getting it, but I'm only like 90% on the 12/18 date.

11/28/2009 10:37:25 AM

it was released here in seattle this past wednesday. day before thankgiving. .... because obviously it's a movie you want to take grandma, grandpa and the kids to go see.

the consensus of reviewers is that its a good attempt to convert to film an un-filmable book. but that it loses in translation the literary beauty that made the horror bearable, and all we're left with is a horror story that's just brutal to sit through and with no real redemption for the viewer.

i have tentative plans to see it on monday.

11/29/2009 12:22:08 AM

I still have yet to read the book.

but I've always been a sucker for post-apocalyptica literature.

11/29/2009 3:08:31 PM

I read the book and liked it a lot.

But I'll be pretty surprised if the movie turns out being good. It'll either need an annoying and ever present narrator to convey the deeper stuff, or it will just be a cross between Mad Max and Schindler's List.

11/29/2009 3:41:15 PM

10/10 read. I finished it in one sitting.

12/3/2009 2:12:11 PM

I, for one, am going to the 7 showing at the Galaxy tomorrow. I've waited my fucking year and some change, time for Grumpy to see Viggo fight cannibals.

12/18/2009 2:46:34 AM

Saw this on Friday. I'm not much of a reader, so I can't compare it to the book, but I did enjoy it. Wasn't expecting Guy Pearce in it, wasn't even fully sure it was him til I got home.

12/21/2009 7:03:49 PM

i thought the movie followed the book amazingly well

im not so sure i'd suggest the movie to people who havent read the book, though. it is a very dark and depressing movie, but still manages to relay the undertones of the book expressing man's push to survive no matter the odds

12/21/2009 7:13:39 PM

I took three people who hadn't read the book, and they all enjoyed it (although one left in tears). I agree that it followed the book well, probably as well as it could -- there's so little conversation in the book I can understand beefing up The Woman's part.

12/21/2009 10:58:17 PM

^ I THINK A FEW OTHER PEOPLE WERE TEARING UP, AS WELL. stupid surprise emotional ending. Good movie, though. If you have a chance to go see it you definitely should!
Who cares if the book is anything like the movie? Reading a book and watching a movie are totally different experiences and imo should not be related as much as some people try.

12/22/2009 8:40:38 AM

^ We're talking about a direct adaptation of a Pulitzer Prize-winning novel here, not Twilight or Amazing Spider-Man #221-233.

12/22/2009 9:10:36 AM

^ a book and a movie are different experiences, regardless of whether it's a pulitzer or not. Some books are so well written that I'm sure it's difficult to translate the feeling it invokes when reading it onto the big screen.

12/22/2009 9:35:12 AM

i think the book was one of the most important books of a generation.

i was a little disappointed by the movie. it was a pretty faithful adaptation. the problem is, you just can't capture the literary genius in a motion picture.

i was also disappointed because it left out two of the most important scenes.

12/22/2009 11:56:03 AM

^ Which scenes? I was trying to remember what had been left out / added in the movie, but its been over a year since I read the book

12/22/2009 3:21:22 PM

The things that stood out to me as having been left out:

1) The Man's time on the boat. It shows him swim out and then back. I recall that part in the book actually lasting several pages.
2) The much quicker scene where they see the marauding band walk across the field, with the teams of hookers and catamites tied up behind them. That scene was pretty moving to me, in the "holy fucking shit that's terrifying" sense.

Otherwise, nothing springs to mind...

12/22/2009 3:41:02 PM

^
Disagree about the boat time, that seemed to lag in the book. Your second point was spot on. That along with the people in the cellar was the spookiest part of the book, and would have made a chilling scene in the movie.

12/22/2009 3:53:21 PM

Oh, I didn't mean to imply that I thought the boat scene should have been included in the film -- I agree that it seemed to drag on a bit too long in the book and wasn't sad to see it left out. It did stand out to me, however, precisely because so much time in the book was dedicated to it as compared with basically zero in the film.

12/22/2009 5:42:46 PM

i'm curious, does the movie try to explain why every thing is burned/where all the ash comes from? just answer yes or no.

[Edited on December 22, 2009 at 6:36 PM. Reason : .]

12/22/2009 6:36:11 PM

no

12/22/2009 7:09:33 PM

excellent. i thought that was a big part of what makes the book.

12/22/2009 7:49:50 PM

Quote :

"I am of the unwavering belief that the two best lines in English literature are "All right, then, I'll go to hell," and "My mother is a fish." "

I hardly post anymore, but I have to chime in and say that I am in complete agreement with this.

12/23/2009 2:08:35 PM

no one reads (post % 50) == 49

12/26/2009 1:44:59 AM